create_histogram_chart

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

No annotations are present, so the description fully covers behavioral traits: it creates a new sheet with a binned data table and native Excel chart, includes specific features (frequency columns, cumulative curve, P10-P90 band), and is idempotent (replaces target sheet).

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then detailed specifics. Every sentence is essential with no redundancy.

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 histogram creation tool with an output schema, the description covers prerequisites, idempotency, and the detailed chart structure. It is complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke the tool.

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 100% with well-described parameters. The description repeats default values but does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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?

Description clearly states the specific verb 'Render' and resource 'histogram of one output's simulation result distribution'. It distinguishes from sibling chart tools like create_tornado_chart and create_cdf_chart by detailing the histogram view and referencing ModelRisk's Results Viewer.

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?

Description explicitly requires a completed simulation and notes idempotency, providing clear context for when to use. It does not list alternatives but implies its specific purpose among sibling chart tools.

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