origin_plot

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the tool is a parameterized entry point and lists valid kinds, but does not disclose side effects, auth requirements, or error behavior. 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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage context, third lists kinds and references. Concise, front-loaded, but the list of kinds is long and could be clearer.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description doesn't explain return values. It covers kind but not other parameters. For a tool with 7 params, it lacks completeness in parameter guidance.

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%, requiring the description to explain parameters. It only adds meaning for 'kind' by listing valid values; other 6 parameters (path, selected_cols, graph_name, title, export_path, style_mode) are unexplained.

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 tool creates a table-based plot selected by 'kind'. It lists many plot kinds and distinguishes itself from dedicated sibling tools like origin_plot_line and origin_plot_scatter.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (compact profile, generic entry) and when not to (use dedicated tools for line/scatter/column/histogram/box, use origin_plot_matrix_id for matrix-range plots), specifying alternatives.

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