hebbrix_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool exports everything in a collection, explains the two output formats and the 'document' key for markdown, and assures 'nothing is locked in'. It doesn't explicitly state non-destructive behavior, but the 'export' framing implies safety.

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 three short, focused sentences: clear action, usage context, and format clarification. No redundant or vague language, every sentence earns its place.

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 the tool has only two optional parameters and an output schema, the description need not spell out return structures. It sufficiently covers purpose, scope, and format variants, though a precise note on collection_id's default behavior would make it fully 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'format' parameter's values and return types, but does not explain the semantics of 'collection_id' (e.g., what null means). With only one of two parameters clarified, this is partial compensation.

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') and the resource ('a collection'), and enumerates what is included (memories, knowledge-graph entities, compiled profile). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hebbrix_get (single item retrieval) and hebbrix_search (query-based).

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 provides a clear use case: 'use it to back up or migrate a memory space'. It implies when to use for complete data portability, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools for targeted exports, so it falls short of a 5.

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