export_gif

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it honours frame durations and tags, and explains the overwrite parameter, but omits other behaviors like palette handling or layer scope, leaving gaps.

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 very short and front-loaded with purpose, but it sacrifices completeness. For a tool with 4 parameters, it lacks structure and detail, making it barely adequate.

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 complexity (4 params, no output schema, no annotations, many siblings), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain required parameters, scale, or overall export behavior, which is insufficient for safe and correct invocation.

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%, but description only explains 'overwrite' parameter. Required parameters 'filename' and 'output' are not explained, and 'scale' is undocumented. This is insufficient for correct parameter usage.

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 states 'Export the full animation as an animated GIF' with specific verb and resource, and mentions 'honours frame durations & tags', which distinguishes it from siblings like export_png or export_tag_gif.

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 usage when preserving animation timing and tags, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_tag_gif or export_spritesheet, nor does it provide exclusions.

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