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

The description reinforces the readOnlyHint annotation by stating 'Read-only: returns merged Markdown without changing Space content,' adding specific behavioral details about the output and side effects. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise, consisting of three focused sentences with no redundant information. Each sentence adds value: purpose, read-only behavior, and alternative usage guidance.

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?

The description is self-contained for the tool's simple scope: it explains the input (selected items), the output (merged Markdown), the side effects (none), and provides differentiation from related workflows. It does not require additional context to be used 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?

Both parameters (space_id and item_ids) have descriptions that clarify their meaning and role, and schema coverage is 100%. The descriptions are clear, though they could provide more detail about constraints or formats, but they adequately cover the semantics.

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's purpose: exporting selected Space pages, folders, or docs as Markdown. It specifies the verb 'export' and the resource type, and distinguishes from other tools by mentioning the MCP response and browser guidance for other export flows.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user wants a Markdown export') and when not to ('Use browser guidance for PDF, ZIP, or download-only export flows'), providing clear guidance on alternative approaches.

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