origin_add_plot_to_graph

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, required graph existence, error handling, or what happens upon success. This is insufficient for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. While not verbose, it fails to include essential information, making it less effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no annotation, many siblings), the description is incomplete. It does not cover prerequisites, return values, parameter relationships, or how it differs from similar tools, leaving significant gaps 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 0%, yet the description adds no meaning about the parameters. It does not explain what each parameter (e.g., worksheet, x_col, y_col) represents or how they interact, leaving the agent to rely solely on parameter names and types.

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 the verb 'Add' and the resource 'worksheet X/Y plot to an existing graph layer', clearly identifying the action and target. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like origin_plot_scatter or origin_plot, which also add plots, making the purpose less distinctive.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as origin_plot or origin_plot_scatter. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, exclusions, or typical usage scenarios.

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