export_node_as_image

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention output format (e.g., base64, binary, URL), potential side effects (none expected), or authentication requirements. This leaves the agent uncertain about the invocation result.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify return semantics and operational constraints. It fails to mention what the agent receives after export (e.g., image data, URL) and whether any node types are unsupported. This is a significant gap for successful invocation.

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 descriptions for all three parameters (scale, format, nodeId) with enum for format, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 (export), object (node), and result (image). It is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on creation, modification, or deletion, not 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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative comparisons are provided. Since there is no sibling export tool, the usage context is implied by the tool's unique purpose, but the description could still mention typical scenarios (e.g., generating assets for a design).

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