export_map_view

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for disclosing behavior. It mentions exporting to PNG but does not address potential side effects, file size, or whether it requires a specific map view state. No annotation contradictions exist.

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 short sentence that communicates the core purpose efficiently. It is front-loaded with key information, but the brevity sacrifices completeness.

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 lacks context for the four parameters, the existence of multiple maps (map_name), and comparison with sibling export_layout. The output schema exists but is not leveraged by the description.

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 description adds no semantic value for any of the 4 parameters (width, height, map_name, output_path). Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain these inputs.

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 verb 'export', the resource 'map view', the output format 'PNG image', and the use case 'visual check'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_layout (different export target) and get_layer_info (information retrieval).

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_layout or zoom_to_layer. It implies use for visual checks but offers no when-not or comparative guidance.

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