lira_export_text

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

readOnlyHint already covers the safety profile and an output schema exists, so the bar is lower, but the description adds little beyond naming the export format. It doesn't say whether it exports the currently open model or a specified one, whether output is large, or what 'documents 0-8' means for scope.

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?

One short sentence with no waste, but it is terse to the point of under-specification; the parenthetical is the only detail and it is opaque.

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?

The output schema covers return values, but the undefined 'model' parameter and absent usage context leave real gaps for a simple export tool that an agent needs to call correctly.

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?

There is one optional parameter 'model' with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. An agent cannot tell whether it takes a model name, a path, or is simply ignored in favor of the open model.

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 name implies export, and the description identifies the resource (the whole model) and the output format (LIRA's text input format). But it never states an explicit verb ('Export...') and the parenthetical '(documents 0-8 and more)' is cryptic rather than clarifying. It's understandable at a glance but not precisely stated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus lira_model_summary, lira_save_model, or the inverse lira_import_text_model. The import counterpart is the obvious alternative/round-trip partner and is never mentioned.

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