spss_chart_qqplot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the PPLOT and OMS pipeline, but it does not clarify whether the chart is returned directly, saved to a file, or how the data_file parameter affects execution. It also lacks any mention of side effects, prerequisites, or output format details beyond the image types.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and chart type. It avoids unnecessary words, though the acronyms PPLOT and OMS could be slightly more transparent to a general 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?

The core purpose is well-covered, but the description lacks guidance on when to use the tool, parameter semantics for several fields, and behavioral details like return values or file handling. Given the 7-parameter schema and output schema existence, more contextual completeness would be expected.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate for parameter documentation. It does clarify that 'variable' is a continuous variable and lists image formats (matching image_format), but it leaves dpi, title, dimensions, and data_file unexplained. This is only partial compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 exports a specific chart type (normal Q-Q plot) with supported formats (PNG/TIFF/EMF) for a continuous variable, using a specified method (PPLOT via OMS). This distinguishes it from sibling chart tools and statistical procedures.

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?

The description implies usage for continuous variables to create normal Q-Q plots, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as spss_normality_outliers or other chart types. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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