create_chart

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, so the tool modifies data. The description 'create' aligns with that. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing charts, required permissions, or data validation). The description adds minimal value beyond the annotation.

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 extremely concise (4 words), but it sacrifices necessary detail. While brevity is valued, the description should be front-loaded with key information. Here, it is too minimal to be useful, so it scores average.

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 tool complexity (8 parameters, destructive hint) and rich sibling context, the description is insufficient. It omits usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and behavioral details. Even with an output schema, the description fails to provide a complete picture for correct invocation.

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?

Input schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description provides no explanation of any parameter (e.g., what chart_type values are valid, the format of data_range, or purpose of target_cell). Without enum constraints or descriptions, the agent lacks crucial information to set parameters correctly.

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 'Create chart in worksheet' clearly states the action (create) and the resource (chart) with location (worksheet). It is specific enough to differentiate from siblings like create_pivot_table or create_table. However, it lacks details about what kind of chart or any constraints.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_pivot_table or create_table. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context about data range requirements are provided. The description is silent on usage scenarios.

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