Export DATEV

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

Annotations already denote a safe, idempotent read operation. The description goes beyond by detailing the return value (signed download URL, 24h validity), encoding (CP1252), date constraints, and error behavior ('unavailable' response). No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise and well-structured. The main purpose is stated in the first sentence. Supported formats are listed in a bullet list for clarity. Bilingual text is included without redundancy. Every sentence adds information.

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 tool with three simple parameters (all required) and an output schema, the description fully covers usage, parameter constraints, return type, and edge cases. The presence of an output schema means return values are documented elsewhere, so the description is 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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by clarifying that dates must be ISO 8601 and explaining each EXTF format's meaning (e.g., 'extf-buchungsstapel — Journal entries'). This enhances agent understanding beyond the schema.

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 accounting data in DATEV EXTF format for import into compatible systems. It lists specific supported formats, distinguishing it from sibling export tools like einvoice_export or payroll_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?

The description explains when to use the tool, specifying the export formats and date requirements. It mentions the backend availability check, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it, though context with siblings implies unique purpose.

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