origin_plot_line_symbol

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions importing and creating a graph, but does not disclose side effects, such as whether it modifies existing worksheets, overwrites data, or requires specific permissions. The 22 parameters imply complex behavior not explained.

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 too brief for a tool with 22 parameters. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, leaving many aspects unexplained.

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 22 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is highly incomplete. An output schema exists but is not described. The tool's complexity demands a richer description to be usable.

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%. The description adds no meaning to any of the 22 parameters, many of which relate to data import (e.g., delimiter, encoding, header). It fails to connect the parameters to the import step.

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 imports table data and creates a line+symbol graph. It distinguishes from siblings like origin_plot_line (line only) and origin_plot_scatter (symbols only) by specifying 'line+symbol'. However, it does not clarify what 'table data' refers to (e.g., file or worksheet).

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 over alternatives like origin_plot_line, origin_plot_scatter, or origin_plot_auto. No prerequisites or context provided. The description is too generic to help an agent decide.

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