origin_export_all_graphs

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or what state the project must be in. The parameter 'overwrite' hints at behavior but is not explained.

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 very concise (one sentence) but sacrifices valuable information. While brevity is good, the lack of structure or additional details makes it less useful.

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 4 parameters with no descriptions, no annotations, and unknown output schema content, the description leaves many critical questions unanswered (e.g., behavior of defaults, allowed file types). It is insufficient for safe and correct 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not add any meaning to the parameters. It fails to explain output_dir, file_type, overwrite, or width, leaving the agent without necessary context to use them correctly.

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), resource (all graphs), and scope (current Origin project). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool origin_export_graph, which exports a single graph.

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 tool versus alternatives like origin_export_graph. The description does not specify when it is appropriate or inappropriate to use.

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