export_dataset

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals auto-pagination through the 2000-row cap, the 500K row limit, the file path returned in the response, and configurable output directory via environment variable with default. While it doesn't discuss error handling or authorization, it covers the key operational traits an agent needs.

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 three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: stating the action and key capability, giving usage context, and noting limits and configurability. It is front-loaded and without redundancy, every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a moderately complex export tool with no output schema, the description addresses all essential aspects: purpose, usage case, alternative, row cap, output location configuration, and the return value (file path). It leaves no significant gaps that would cause an agent to misuse the tool.

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?

The input schema already documents all parameters with 100% coverage (fields, filter, format, order_by, database_id, table_id). The description adds a small hint about using filters for larger tables but doesn't deeply expand parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies given the high schema coverage.

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 exports full row-level data to a local CSV or JSON file, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting auto-pagination through the 2000-row cap and explicitly contrasting with query_dataset for analytical queries.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when you need complete data for external analysis') and names the alternative tool ('For analytical queries, use query_dataset with aggregations instead'). It also gives a practical constraint for larger tables ('add filters for larger tables').

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