export_still

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that DRX is included for later grade application, but fails to describe side effects (e.g., whether files are created on disk), required permissions, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a mutation operation.

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 extremely concise at 14 words, but this conciseness comes at the cost of omitting critical information about parameters and behavior. While front-loaded, it does not earn its place by providing sufficient utility.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not described), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain required arguments, output format, or any nuances of the export process. The presence of an output schema does not excuse the lack of explanation about what the tool returns.

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 contains 6 parameters (4 required) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention any parameter names, types, or constraints. It adds no meaning beyond the schema itself, failing to compensate for the lack of documentation.

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 selected Gallery stills, including DRX format for later grade application. It uses a specific verb 'Export' and resource 'Gallery stills', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_stills or save_powergrade. However, it could be more precise about the meaning of 'including DRX'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_stills, save_powergrade). The description simply states what the tool does without any context about prerequisites or scenarios where it is appropriate.

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