Api folders export retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing the return format: a zip file containing a JSON dump of objects plus their relationships, which is exactly what an agent needs to know since there is no output schema. It stops short of stating permissions or handling of large domains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the most important fact (output is a zip of JSON objects and relationships) is stated immediately.

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?

For a read-only, non-destructive export tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential unknown: what the response actually is (a zip with a JSON dump). It leaves the meaning of the 'id' path parameter and permission requirements unspecified, which is the remaining gap.

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 0% for the single required 'id' parameter, so the description must carry that load. It only indirectly implies that 'id' identifies the 'domain' being exported and never states whether that is a folder id, domain id, or something else, nor its expected format.

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 and output artifact: 'Export the domain as a zip file containing a JSON dump of all objects and their relationships.' This is far more informative than the bare name 'folders_export_retrieve,' but it does not name or distinguish itself from the obvious sibling ciso_assistant_api_folders_import_create or from generic folders_retrieve/list, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'Export.' There is no statement of when to choose this over folders_retrieve, folders_object_retrieve, or folders_import_create, and no prerequisites (permissions, whether the export is synchronous, size limits) are mentioned.

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