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

Annotations only declare readOnly/destructive/openWorld/idempotent hints; the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the unguessable 128-bit token URL, the ~15-minute expiry, that no inline bytes are returned, that each call yields a fresh link (explaining idempotentHint=false), and what contact data the file contains.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and content scope, and most sentences carry distinct information. The trailing 'The link is temporary.' restates the earlier ~15-minute expiry and is the only wasted sentence.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the case is nonetheless covered with the download-link and data-content details. The description also flags the sensitivity of the exported contact data, which is the key thing an agent needs to know before calling.

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 100% and the single `code` parameter is fully documented in the schema (8-character publication code, returned by list_surveys). The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (exports), resource (respondents pipeline report, one row per respondent across all respondent lists on the survey's publication), and format (CSV), which separates it from export_respondents_spss, export_respondents_xlsx and export_survey_responses without opening any schema.

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?

Format choice versus the SPSS/XLSX siblings is only implied, and there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to export_survey_responses. The 're-run for a fresh link' instruction is a usage hint, but routing guidance for the alternatives is left to inference.

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