Spss Chart Boxplot

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Export' implies a file write, but the description never says where the file lands, what its name will be, whether existing files are overwritten, or whether an active SPSS session/data file is required. The GGRAPH + OMS mention is an implementation detail that does not help an agent anticipate side effects.

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?

Two tight sentences with the main action front-loaded and no filler. The 'via GGRAPH + OMS' clause is arguably lower-value than missing details like output destination, but it does not bloat the text.

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?

For a 10-parameter export tool with no annotations, the description is thin: the file-destination question, the role of data_file, and resolution/size parameters are all unaddressed. The existence of an output schema covers return values, which keeps this from being a 1.

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 0% across 10 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It explains only 'variable' (continuous) and 'category' (optional grouping); dpi, width_px, height_px, title, x_label, y_label, and especially data_file are left entirely unexplained.

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 verb and resource ('Export a publication-ready box-and-whisker plot'), names the output formats (PNG/TIFF/EMF) and the underlying engine (GGRAPH + OMS). It is clearly distinct from siblings like spss_chart_histogram or spss_chart_scatter, though it never explicitly says so.

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?

'Provide a continuous variable and optionally a categorical grouping variable' gives input-level guidance and implies the required continuous-vs-categorical data shape. There is no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to other chart siblings, and no mention of prerequisites such as whether a dataset must already be loaded or what data_file does.

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