data_export

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core side effect of writing to disk but does not mention whether an existing file is overwritten, whether parent directories need to exist, what happens on failure, or what the return value is. For a write operation, overwrite behavior is important context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, the source, the destination, and the supported formats efficiently.

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 simple three-parameter tool with a fully documented schema, the description is mostly adequate. Still, the missing overwrite/error/return behavior leaves some operational ambiguity that an agent would need to handle when invoking the tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents 'data', 'path', and 'format' adequately. The description adds a little context by enumerating CSV, TSV, Excel, and RDS, but this does not materially go beyond the schema's own format list and override semantics.

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 names a specific verb ('Write'), the resource ('dataset from the session'), and the output destination ('to disk') with concrete formats. It is clearly distinct from read-oriented siblings like data_load or data_list, but it does not explicitly name or contrast a sibling.

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 clearly conveys that this tool is for persisting an in-session dataset to disk, so the usage context is implied. However, it does not state when not to use it, mention prerequisites (e.g., the dataset must already exist in the session), or point to alternatives like data_load for reading data in.

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