One thing I like is that:

    foo(a=1, b=2, c=3)

is shorter (and, I would argue, clearer) than

    foo().a(1).b(2).c(3)

and requires only one method declaration and one method call.

Also for constructors you don't have to worry about partial or out-of-order initialization. Is the above the same as

    foo().c(3).b(2).a(1) ??

What if one call involves opening a file or allocating some resource that is used by another call?

One nice thing that method chaining does give you is being able to differentiate external and internal parameter names. Swift (for example) supports this with argument labels for doing things like

  insert(something, into: list, at: position)

rather than having to use the variable name:

  insert(something, list:list, pos:position)

Of course I wish that Swift supported ObjC/Smalltalk-like syntax so you could just do

   insert a into: list at: position

Note SwiftUI actually uses method chaining for some reason. It's OK but I would have been fine with named parameters.

But I do like Smalltalk's method chaining/cascade syntax:

   robot walkForward; wave; sitDown.