export_documentation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about potential long execution times ('Puede tomar varios minutos') and the optional max_pages parameter for limiting output, but does not cover other aspects like error handling, file overwriting behavior, or required permissions. It compensates partially but not fully for the lack of annotations.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, followed by key details (format, warning, parameter usage), and ending with concrete examples. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy.

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 complexity (export operation with potential long runtime) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the main purpose, key behavioral traits, and parameter usage through examples, but could improve by addressing error cases or output structure more explicitly.

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 all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning max_pages in the warning and examples, but does not provide additional syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Exporta toda la documentación') and resource ('de una tecnología'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_documentation_index or get_page_content which retrieve rather than export. It specifies the output format (Markdown files) and destination (local directory), making the purpose 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 clear context for when to use this tool (exporting entire documentation sets to local files) and includes a warning about time for large documentations, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings. It implies usage for bulk exports versus single-page retrieval tools.

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