export_selected

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., whether files are overwritten, if selection is required). It does not contradict the annotations, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and every word serves the purpose. However, it is quite sparse, potentially leaving out important nuances, so it doesn't earn a perfect 5.

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's simplicity, the description is minimally adequate for understanding its core function. However, it lacks guidance on when to use it, parameter details, and any behavioral caveats despite having annotations and an output schema. The presence of many similar export tools heightens the need for more contextual information.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'filepath' or 'format' parameters. It implies an export destination but lacks details on format defaults or required/optional semantics. Since the description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, a low score is warranted.

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 'Export objek yang dipilih' (Export selected objects), using a specific verb and resource. The 'selected' scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_glb, export_stl_mm, and export_scene. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no mentions of when it is appropriate, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools like export_glb and export_stl_mm suggest format-specific options, but this tool's relation to them is not clarified.

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