export_sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the return artifact (JSON to paste into Import JSON), the optional persistence side effect (save:true lands in Saved Automations and the Library), and that it is non-executing and quota-free. It omits failure modes and any auth/permission requirements, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Front-loads the core transformation and return value, then layers usage and safety guidance. Dense but the two sentences are long and include some parenthetical detail; still, no sentence is filler.

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 9-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description explains the nature of the return (JSON for import) and the key side effect, which is the right level of detail. It does not sketch the JSON shape or note limits (e.g., 100-step cap), leaving minor gaps.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by explaining save:true's destination and by giving a safety rule for step contents ('Put {{username}}/{{password}} placeholders in fill steps instead of real credentials; never include cookies').

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?

States a concrete verb+resource: turning a list of steps into an editable, re-runnable PageBolt sequence and returning JSON for the dashboard Sequence Builder. It explicitly differentiates from siblings by saying it does not run the sequence, unlike record_video / run_sequence.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('Use it after you have planned a video/sequence'), the benefit for the user (tweak steps/highlights/narration), the follow-up tools (record_video / run_sequence), and a clear exclusion ('Does not run the sequence or consume quota').

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