Spss Chart Histogram

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the export mechanism, supported formats, and that a chart file path is returned. It omits important behavior such as where files are written, whether existing files are overwritten, and whether an active SPSS session or dataset is required.

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 compact sentences with the action and output format front-loaded and no filler. The GGRAPH/OMS IMAGE jargon is minor noise but adds implementation context rather than padding.

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?

Although an output schema exists so return values need not be spelled out, a 9-parameter charting tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations needs far more guidance than two sentences. The description does not explain how sizing, DPI, labels, or data_file affect the result.

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 9 parameters, so the description must compensate, yet it only clarifies that "variable" should be continuous. Nothing is said about dpi, width_px/height_px, image_format, title/x_label/y_label, or the role of data_file, leaving most inputs 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Export a publication-ready histogram") plus the underlying mechanism (GGRAPH + OMS IMAGE) and output formats. It does not differentiate itself from the very similar sibling spss_chart_histogram_density, so an agent must guess which to pick.

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 the continuous variable" hints at the input requirement but gives no when-to-use context, no exclusions, and no mention of the near-identical spss_chart_histogram_density or other chart siblings. The agent is left to infer selection criteria entirely.

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