Backup Export

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the artifact location (ZIP in <home>/exports) and the restore caveat about new ids, but says nothing about permissions, whether an existing export is overwritten, or failure modes for a missing workspace.

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?

Bold-labeled sections (Use when / Returns / Example / Notes) are front-loaded and scannable, each carrying distinct information with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so omitting deeper return-value detail is acceptable, and usage plus the sibling pointer are covered. The remaining gap is the undocumented connection_id, which an agent may need to supply.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies workspace and domain through the parenthetical and two concrete examples, but connection_id is never mentioned or explained anywhere, leaving one of three parameters semantically opaque.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (export a workspace or a domain to a ZIP), specifies the output location (<home>/exports), and distinguishes itself from the sibling backup_import, which it names as the reverse operation.

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?

Provides an explicit 'Use when' clause (before big changes, or to move knowledge to another machine) and routes restoration to backup_import. It lacks an explicit 'do not use for X' exclusion, but the context and the named alternative make selection unambiguous.

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