export_report

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

Discloses key behaviors: writes timestamped files to ./reports, returns file paths or error. No contradictions with missing annotations. Could mention if directory is created automatically.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Action and return value clearly presented.

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?

Covers core functionality, return type, and error condition. Sufficient for a simple export tool with no output schema. Could add minor details about directory creation.

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?

No parameters exist, so description is not required to add param info. Baseline 3 increased to 4 because description effectively communicates tool behavior without parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool writes the most recent run to JSON and Markdown files in ./reports, differentiating it from sibling tools that list models/probes or run probes.

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?

Indicates usage after a run has been performed (error if no run) but does not explicitly mention sibling tools like run_probe or run_single as prerequisites.

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