export_to_markdown

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

The description discloses that the tool returns markdown text and mentions the YAML frontmatter fields. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on side effects, authentication, or error handling. It does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 simple export tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value. It covers purpose and output format, but misses some behavioral context like that it does not modify the email. Given the complexity, it is mostly complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema for the parameters (id, folder, account). It focuses on output format rather than input details.

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 tool exports an email as markdown with YAML frontmatter. It uses a specific verb ('export') and resource ('email'), and the format is detailed. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_email or list_emails.

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 implies usage by mentioning the output can be saved or copied, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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