create_crossfilter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It describes the real-time updating behavior and technical constraint (Panel-native rendering). However, it does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or the output structure (despite an output schema existing). The disclosure is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. It is efficient but includes a slightly technical phrase ('HoloViews killer feature') that adds flavor but is not essential. Still, it remains concise.

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?

Given the complexity of a crossfilter tool, the description explains the real-time linking behavior but omits prerequisites (e.g., dataset loaded, Panel server running) and does not mention the output schema. It is sufficient for basic understanding but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter is described in the input schema. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no explanation of the views format). Thus, it meets the baseline expectation but adds no value.

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 creates a 'linked crossfilter dashboard' with real-time filtering. It uses specific verbs and resources, and the mention of 'brush/select' explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_dashboard and create_plot.

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 explains the interactive behavior (brush/select filtering) and notes that it's only possible with Panel-native rendering, which gives context on when to use it. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or direct alternatives, so it doesn't fully guide selection among siblings.

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