open_drawio_csv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only states it 'opens the editor' and mentions CSV format. No disclosure of side effects, permissions, or constraints beyond input format. The action is a mutation (editing), yet no behavioral implications are described.

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, each serving a purpose: first defines action and input, second adds format context. No redundant information. Could be slightly more structured but is efficient.

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 simple tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers input requirements and format context. It does not need to explain return values, which are implied (the editor UI). Completeness is good given tool complexity.

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% (all 3 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context about the CSV format following draw.io's specification, which enriches understanding but does not detail individual parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Opens the draw.io editor with a diagram generated from CSV data', specifying the action (opens), resource (draw.io editor), and input format (CSV). It distinguishes from siblings (open_drawio_mermaid, open_drawio_xml) by focusing on CSV, making selection unambiguous.

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 description implies use when CSV data is available, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., Mermaid or XML formats). No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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