chart_multi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be read-only. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., side effects, auth needs, rate limits), but does not contradict annotations. It provides basic purpose but does not enhance transparency beyond the annotations.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core action. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's purpose.

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 has 6 parameters, nested series objects, and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It omits crucial context like how to structure series input, how time_range interacts with start/end dates, and what the output looks like. The description leaves agents underinformed 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?

Schema description coverage is 67%, meaning several parameters lack descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-specific guidance, so it does not compensate for the gaps. For example, it does not explain the series array structure or time_range format, leaving agents to rely solely on the partial schema.

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 plots multiple data series on one chart, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like chart_line (single series) and chart_bar by explicitly mentioning multiple series and comparison.

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 provides clear context by noting the tool is useful for comparing different variables, implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, missing a chance to fully differentiate from siblings.

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