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

Annotations confirm a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the export is queued asynchronously, status is polled with job_id, and downloading requires a Jsonify browser sign-in (auth constraint). This goes meaningfully beyond the annotation set.

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?

Two tight sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the auth caveat following. No wasted words, though it could have spent a clause on the format/version parameters instead of staying this terse.

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 output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and the async/auth behavior is covered. However, with 6 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no mention of format or version, the definition is not complete enough for an agent to call it confidently in all modes.

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 0% across 6 parameters, so the description must carry the load, yet it only clarifies job_id and vaguely gestures at the table. Format (csv/xlsx/json enum), version, dataset_id, and workspace_id receive no semantic explanation, leaving most parameters undocumented.

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+resource ('Queue an export of the full selected immutable table') and clarifies the dual read-back mode via job_id. This distinguishes it from read-oriented siblings like query_dataset and browse_dataset_rows, though it never names those siblings 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?

It implies two usage modes (queue an export vs. read status with job_id) but gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over query_dataset or browse_dataset_rows, and no prerequisites beyond the browser sign-in note for downloads.

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