origin-mcp-kimi

by wxxuan2000-gif

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

origin_plot_auto

Selects a chart type from tabular data and generates the plot, accepting custom column mappings and file parameters.

Instructions

Choose a chart route from table data and create the plot.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`path`	Yes
`intent`	No
`x_col`	No
`y_cols`	No
`z_col`	No
`y_error_col`	No
`x_error_col`	No
`book_name`	No
`sheet_name`	No
`excel_sheet`	No
`delimiter`	No
`encoding`	No
`header`	No
`skiprows`	No
`nrows`	No
`na_values`	No
`graph_name`	No
`title`	No
`x_label`	No
`y_label`	No
`style_mode`	No	origin_default
`palette_name`	No
`export_path`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 13, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits, but it merely states the action without explaining auto-selection behavior, side effects, or output characteristics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is overly terse (one sentence) at the expense of clarity; it fails to provide essential context and thus is under-specified rather than concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 23 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and a complex operation, the description is entirely inadequate; it lacks details on input, process, and output, despite the existence of an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it provides no information about any of the 23 parameters, leaving the agent completely in the dark.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Choose a chart route from table data and create the plot' is vague; 'chart route' is unclear and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'origin_plot' or 'origin_recommend_chart', which also involve plotting.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no context about prerequisites or optimal usage scenarios.

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

Deploy Server