project_export_labels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says labels are exported to a text file; it does not disclose whether the file is overwritten, what format or extension is expected, what happens with no labels, or whether the operation has side effects.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core action stated first and a minimal parameter explanation. There is 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 one-parameter tool, the essentials are present, but the lack of file-format, overwrite, and alternative-tool guidance leaves ambiguity. The presence of the sibling 'label_export' tool makes this incompleteness more noticeable.

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 schema provides no description for the 'path' parameter, so the description's 'Absolute path for the exported labels file' adds meaningful semantics. It clarifies the required input, though it does not mention file extension or directory requirements.

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 action and resource: 'Export all labels to a text file.' This distinguishes it from audio-export and processing tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from the similarly named sibling 'label_export'.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus label_export, label_export_chapters, or label_export_audio_segments. The description implies a simple export use case but does not state exclusions or alternatives.

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