plot_line

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states the output format (PNG image) but omits behavioral traits such as handling of missing data, axis scaling, or default styling. This insufficiently informs the agent of the tool's behavior.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, it lacks structure and barely covers essential details. It is adequate in length but at the expense of completeness.

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 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify input constraints (e.g., matching array lengths), output characteristics, or any additional context needed for correct usage.

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 has 5 parameters with 0% coverage (no descriptions). The description does not explain any parameter, not even the required x and y arrays. Although parameter names are somewhat suggestive, the description should add meaning beyond the schema, which it fails to do.

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?

Description clearly states the tool draws a line chart from x/y data and returns a PNG image, using specific verb (绘制) and resource (折线图). It distinguishes from sibling plotting tools like plot_function and plot_histogram by its focus on line charts.

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?

No usage guidance provided. Description does not indicate when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor when not to use it. Sibling tools exist for other plot types, but the description lacks explicit differentiation or context.

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