generatePlotSettings

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions generating a file and returning parsed settings, but does not clarify file side effects (e.g., overwriting, disk usage), dependencies (e.g., simulation data), or the nature of the parsed output. The agent cannot infer important behavioral constraints.

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 sentence, making it concise, but it sacrifices helpful details. It is front-loaded with the core function, yet the brevity results in insufficient guidance for correct usage.

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 (14 parameters, optional settings), the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the relationship to other plot tools, the generation process, or the structure of the parsed settings. Crucial context for an agent to use the tool effectively is missing.

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?

The input schema has 14 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only mentions 'vectors' implicitly, leaving the other 13 parameters (e.g., mode, axis limits, output path) unexplained. The agent has no insight into their meaning or usage beyond schema types and defaults.

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 that the tool generates an LTspice .plt file from vectors and returns parsed settings for debugging. It identifies the verb 'Generate', the resource 'LTspice .plt file', and the output purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'generatePlotPresetSettings', but the resource name is distinct.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The agent is left without context for invocation decisions.

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