create_chart

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses chart types, range constraints, and default anchor cell, but lacks warnings about side effects, permissions, or behavior when overlapping data. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

The description is brief (5 lines) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It logically lists chart types then range specifications. No redundant sentences, but could be slightly more compact.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., chart ID). It covers creation aspects but omits return value, error conditions, and the fact that the chart is embedded on the specified sheet. Incomplete for a tool with 18 parameters.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'chart_type' (lists valid values), 'domain_range' and 'series_ranges' (single row/column, sheet prefix), and 'anchor_cell' default. However, 18 parameters exist; many like 'pie_hole', 'header_count', 'stacked_type' are left unexplained. Partial compensation.

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 clearly states the action ('Create an embedded chart') and the resource ('from existing sheet data'). It specifies the source and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_chart_from_spec' and 'update_chart'.

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 usage for creating embedded charts but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'create_chart_from_spec'). No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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