discover_creators_to_file

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

The description discloses several behaviors not covered by annotations: automatic pagination up to 10 pages/500 creators, return of file path and summary stats instead of raw data, and credit cost of 0.01 per creator. These provide useful decision-making context beyond the annotations, which only set readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false.

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 four sentences, each serving a purpose: main action, pagination detail, return format, cost, and usage context. It is front-loaded with the action and free of repetition.

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?

The description covers the key aspects for a file-export tool: action, file format, pagination limits, return format, cost, and when to use. It doesn't mention prerequisites like setup_export_path, but given the existing annotations and output schema, the description is largely complete for agent decision-making.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter already documented (e.g., pages range, filters structure, sort options). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so baseline score 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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Search creators and save results directly to a CSV file on disk.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting it returns file path and summary stats 'instead of raw data' and by specifying 'when the user wants to save, export, or download a list of creators.'

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 this when the user wants to save, export, or download a list of creators.' It also implies that raw data is not returned, suggesting alternative usage when raw data is needed, but does not explicitly name sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use conditions, so a 4.

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