set_data_labels

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself. It does convey the core mutation (show/hide) and the configurable units/decimals, but it does not mention reversibility, scope (only the identified visual), or whether units/decimals apply only when labels are shown.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and object, no filler. Every phrase earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple setter, the description is almost adequate, but with no annotations or output schema it leaves some gaps: supported chart types, relationship between show and decimals/displayUnits, and effect on existing label formatting. Still, combined with the schema an agent can invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions cover 0% of parameters, but the description maps 'show/hide' to show, lists allowed displayUnits values (None|Thousands|Millions|Billions|Auto), and explains decimals. This is valuable because the schema has no enums or descriptions; the required IDs remain self-explanatory by name.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description states a specific action ('Show/hide') on a specific resource ('data labels on a chart') and lists the configurable aspects. It does not explicitly differentiate from the many other set_* visual tools, but the resource and options are clear enough.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided; it only implies that this is for toggling data labels on a chart. With dozens of sibling formatting setters, this does not help the agent decide when to choose this over set_visual_title or set_axis, but it is not misleading.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.