Spss Chart Line

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the implementation (GGRAPH + OMS IMAGE) and that a file path is returned, but it says nothing about where the file is written, whether an existing file is overwritten, whether an active SPSS session/data file is required, or how image_format/format tradeoffs behave.

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 sentences with no filler, front-loading the action and output formats before the minimal input requirement and return value. Nothing in the text is redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return value needn't be explained, yet the description covers only 2 of 10 parameters and omits the critical question of output file location for an export tool. For a 10-parameter export operation with zero schema coverage and no annotations, this is materially incomplete.

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 adds meaning only for x ('time/ordinal') and y, leaving dpi, width_px, height_px, data_file, title, x_label, y_label and image_format entirely to infer from bare names and defaults.

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 line chart') plus the output formats, which separates it from sibling chart tools like spss_chart_scatter or spss_chart_bar. It does not explicitly name a sibling or state the condition that selects a line chart over those, so it falls short of a 5.

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 clause 'Provide the x (time/ordinal) and y variables' implies the intended usage context (a continuous series plotted against time or an ordinal axis), which is genuine guidance. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no routing to alternative chart tools for non-sequential data, so usage is only implied.

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