arcgis_export_layout

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

The description discloses key behaviors: the export runs in the user's open Pro instance, is visible to the user, and returns output path and file size. No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden and does so well.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and contains no superfluous information. 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?

The description covers the execution context (live Pro instance, user visibility) and return values, which compensates for the lack of output schema. It is complete for a simple export tool, though prerequisites could be mentioned.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the tool exports a layout from a live ArcGIS Pro project to PDF, distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform other tasks like pinging, querying, or running geoprocessing.

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 implies the tool is for exporting layouts when a Pro instance is open, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions.

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