List exports. List past exports for your organization with optional pagination and status filtering. Retrieves data without changing records or spending credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds useful context that it doesn't spend credits, but says nothing about result ordering, page sizes, or response shape.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and no filler. The opening 'List exports.' slightly duplicates the following sentence, a minor redundancy.
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?
No output schema and a nested parameter object, yet the description doesn't clarify the query wrapper or what a returned export record contains. It covers the main intent but leaves the calling contract partly implicit.
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?
Context reports 0% schema description coverage, so the description should compensate. It mentions pagination and status filtering but doesn't explain the nested 'query' wrapper, the limit range, or offset semantics, leaving real gaps.
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 and resource ('List past exports for your organization'), which clearly distinguishes this from dealmachine_get_exports_exportId (single export fetch). Scope is stated, but no sibling is named explicitly.
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?
Implies usage for browsing export history, with pagination and status filtering mentioned, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs the sibling get_exports_exportId, nor when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
