Create Chart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the query is read-only and that the output is an image plus a data preview, which is helpful. It stops short of describing limitations, error behavior, or how the image is represented.

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?

Three compact sentences deliver high-value information without filler. The read-only and chart-image purpose is front-loaded, followed by chart types and column mapping, then the return payload.

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 description covers the core invocation details and return payload, but no output schema exists and the description does not specify how the PNG image is delivered (URL, base64, file path). It also leaves the label parameters undocumented, so the definition is workable 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds important meaning: the list of valid chart_type values, how columns map to axes and series, and the read-only nature of the sql parameter. The optional title, x_label, and y_label parameters are left to inference, but their names are largely self-explanatory.

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 states a specific action: run a read-only SQL query and render the result as a PNG chart. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like execute_query by emphasizing chart generation, not just raw query results.

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 intended use is implied: use this tool when you need a visual chart from SQL results. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over execute_query or other sibling tools, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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