session_export_markdown

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what the output contains and that it is 'ready to share', but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, whether it creates a file or returns a string, or any side effects. The absence of significant behavioral risks for an export keeps this at a moderate score.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Export a full Markdown report') and immediately provides valuable context (contents and shareability). Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant 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 simple one-parameter export tool, the description covers the core purpose and output content sufficiently. It does not detail the exact return format (e.g., markdown string vs. file path), but given the absence of an output schema, it provides enough context for an agent to know what to expect. It is not overcomplicated.

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 only parameter, session_id, is not described beyond its name and integer type in the schema. The description mentions 'a session' but does not clarify how to obtain the session ID or any constraints. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaningful parameter semantics.

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 a full Markdown report of a session, specifying the content (timeline of tool calls, key addresses, tools table) and output format. It distinctly differentiates from sibling session_* tools, none of which focus on exporting a shareable 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?

It implies the use case is generating a shareable report, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Given the sibling tools, there is no direct alternative for export, so the context is clear enough for a basic score, but it lacks explicit guidance.

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