Spss Chart Qqplot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior: a normal Q-Q plot is produced via PPLOT and captured through the OMS chart pipeline in PNG/TIFF/EMF, which hints at the SPSS-side mechanics. It omits where the file lands, whether it overwrites, and what dataset context is assumed.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the deliverable and scoped by the pipeline note. No filler, no repetition of the tool name.

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?

Weakness is not here: an output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the sentence covers output type, format options, and the procedure used. The remaining gap is the undocumented data_file/dpi/size parameters and the missing routing hint versus normality_outliers, which the input schema does not supply.

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 7 parameters. The description names the image formats (matching the one enum) and constrains 'variable' to a continuous variable, but says nothing about dpi, width_px, height_px, title, or data_file — leaving most parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 ('Export'), a specific artifact ('normal Q-Q plot of a continuous variable'), the underlying procedure (PPLOT) and the output formats. It is clearly distinguishable from the chart siblings (histogram, scatter, boxplot, errorbar, etc.) which all target different plot types.

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 when-to-use guidance is given. The most relevant routing decision — visual Q-Q plot (this tool) versus spss_normality_outliers (numeric normality testing) — is never addressed, nor is any prerequisite or exclusion stated.

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