Export Document Markdown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., does it alter the document?). The lack of behavioral detail makes it opaque.

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 a single sentence—concise but under-specified. It avoids verbosity, but for a tool with 3 parameters and no other documentation, it is too brief to be effective.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the output is (a string? a file?), how includeFrontmatter affects the result, or any error conditions. Critical context for effective use is missing.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), and the tool description adds no explanation for the three parameters (workspaceId, docId, includeFrontmatter). The agent receives no guidance on parameter usage beyond their names and types.

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 'AFFiNE document content', and the output format 'markdown'. It unambiguously communicates the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like 'export_with_fidelity_report'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'export_with_fidelity_report' or 'read_doc'. No mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions for use.

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