create_matrix

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It clearly states that the operation creates a matrix book and specifies that the returned name may differ from the requested book_name if the name was taken. However, it does not mention whether the tool overwrites existing books or any permission requirements.

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 brief yet comprehensive, with a clear purpose statement, a bulleted Args section, and a Returns note. Every sentence serves a purpose and the structure is logical and front-loaded.

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 the presence of an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description adequately covers the return value. It provides enough detail for a straightforward creation tool, though it could mention potential errors (e.g., invalid name) or side effects.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful value by explaining each parameter: book_name is the name, rows and cols have defaults and are initial sizes. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions, though it could further clarify constraints like minimum values.

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 new matrix book in Origin' and explains that matrices back 3D surface, contour, heatmap, and image plots, which differentiates this from sibling tools like create_worksheet (for worksheets) and create_matrix_plot (for plots on matrices). The verb-resource pair is specific and unambiguous.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_worksheet or create_matrix_plot. It only describes the tool's own function without contextual selection advice or exclusions.

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