origin_plot_histogram

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the responsibility for behavioral transparency. It only mentions importing data and creating a histogram, omitting details like workspace modification, error conditions, or required state (e.g., active worksheet).

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 sacrifices necessary detail. It front-loads the core action but lacks structure or additional context.

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 complexity (20 parameters, many siblings) and lack of output schema explanation (though output schema exists), the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain data import sources, parameter roles, or return value, making it insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 provides no explanation of any of the 20 parameters. The agent receives no help interpreting parameters like 'x_col', 'y_cols', 'delimiter', etc., beyond their 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 clearly states 'create a histogram graph,' specifying the type of plot. However, it does not differentiate from other similar plotting siblings like origin_plot_box or origin_plot_scatter, as it omits the data import aspect which is common to many tools.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., other plot types) or prerequisites (e.g., data must be in a worksheet). The description merely states what it does, not when to use it.

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