export_static_svg

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 that basemap tiles are remote URLs requiring internet, that features are real vector shapes, and that no API key, headless browser, or image library is needed. It stops short of saying what file/path is produced or whether multiple datasets merge into one page.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the output artifact and then the mechanism. No filler, though the line-wrapped formatting slightly obscures the structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the behavioral picture is solid. The significant remaining gap is that a required parameter and the sizing/title options are undocumented anywhere.

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 0% across four parameters, and the description documents none of them explicitly. 'Basemap tiles are referenced by URL' hints at the basemap option, but the required dataset_ids, the title, and the max_px pixel ceiling are never explained.

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 specific verb and artifact: 'Write a printable static map WITH the data drawn, as one self-contained SVG page.' The SVG/vector/print framing implicitly differentiates it from a raster export such as export_static_map, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 described use case (clean PDF printing from the browser print dialog) implies when to choose this tool, but there is no explicit 'use this instead of export_static_map when...' routing or any stated exclusion.

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