Export private agent ledger

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds important behavioral traits: the export limit of 1,000 rows, paper trading context, and privacy assurances. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: core action, usage tip, privacy, and paper trading context. No extraneous information.

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's complexity (8 parameters, nested object, output schema), the description covers purpose, limits, privacy, and paper trading. It could mention the output format or that it's for debugging/reproducibility, but overall it's adequate.

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%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description adds value by highlighting the key filters (runId, decisionId) for reproducible evaluation, but does not significantly expand on the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'Export', the resource 'private ledger rows', scope 'up to 1,000' and 'for the calling API key', and the format 'as JSON'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the private nature and focus on the calling API key.

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 clear guidance: 'Use filters to export a specific runId or decisionId for reproducible evaluation.' It also sets context by stating 'No public Arena user can see this data. Paper trading only...' which helps the agent decide when to use this tool versus others.

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