create_pie_chart

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. 'Create' implies a mutation to the analysis, but the description does not say whether it modifies the analysis definition, what permissions are needed, whether the operation is reversible, or how it interacts with the referenced dataset/sheet. Only the bare mutation semantic is conveyed.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, which is appropriately sized. The phrase 'from simple parameters' is filler that does not earn its place, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

This is a complex mutation tool with 8 parameters (7 required) that references an analysis, sheet, and dataset, yet the description explains none of that context. An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but the absence of any prerequisite or scoping information leaves the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

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 100%, so all eight parameters are already documented in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds nothing beyond that — 'simple parameters' is vague and does not explain the relationship between group_column, value_column, value_aggregation, or the required analysis_id/sheet_id/dataset_identifier set.

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 ('Create a pie chart'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. However, it does nothing to distinguish this tool from siblings like create_bar_chart, create_line_chart, or create_combo_chart beyond the chart type name, and the trailing phrase 'from simple parameters' adds no discriminating information.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose a pie chart over the sibling chart-creation tools, nor any mention of prerequisites such as the analysis or sheet having to exist first. The description is silent on all usage context.

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