export_bubbletea

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

Annotations are absent, so description must disclose behaviors. It states export of current frame but doesn't clarify file-saving vs. content-only behavior (though schema hints via optional filePath). No mention of overwrite policy, permissions, or side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no redundant information. Front-loaded with key purpose and format. Highly efficient.

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?

Without output schema, description could clarify return format (Go code). Current description implies the result is a Bubbletea component but doesn't specify structure or behavior when filePath is omitted. Adequate for a simple export but lacks call-to-action details.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description adds no additional semantics beyond schema; it doesn't explain how parameters affect the output or provide usage examples.

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 specifies verb 'Export', resource 'current frame', and output format 'Bubbletea (Go TUI) component'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like export_ansi, export_html, etc., which export to different formats.

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 on when to use this tool versus other export options (e.g., export_react, export_image). Lacks mention of prerequisites or exclusion criteria, such as whether a frame must be selected or if the tool supports animation.

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