env_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says the output is a portable JSON object but does not disclose whether export is read-only, whether secrets are masked by default, what permissions are required, or what happens if confirmSecrets is omitted when includeSecrets is true.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the core purpose, though that conciseness comes at the cost of behavioral detail.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits critical safety context around secret export, return format expectations, and conditional parameter behavior, leaving the agent to rely entirely on the schema and assumptions.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the general concept of portability and does not add meaning about the conditional relationship between includeSecrets and confirmSecrets beyond what the schema states.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Export an environment configuration as a portable JSON object.' An agent can tell this is an export operation rather than an import or mutation. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like env_import or project_export, but the resource scope is clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus env_import, project_export, or env_get_variable. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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