set_legend

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the primary actions but does not reveal side effects, prerequisites (e.g., requiring an existing visual), or any validation behavior for position values. This leaves the agent with limited insight into the tool's runtime behavior.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It contains no fluff or redundancy and is easy to parse for an agent.

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 relatively simple setter with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core action but lacks important context such as valid position values (only partially listed), behavior when the visual does not exist, or whether changes are persisted. This is acceptable but not thorough.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides example values for the position parameter and implicitly clarifies the show parameter. However, it adds no meaning for the required pageName, visualName, or reportSessionId parameters, which are only identifiable by their names.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Show/hide a chart legend and set its position.' It is distinct from sibling tools like set_visual_title or set_axis, though it does not explicitly reference alternatives.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The description simply states what the tool does without contextual or conditional information.

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