resolve_export_project_backup

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

Annotations provide minimal behavior hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that it creates a new file without overwriting, but lacks details on authorization, error handling, or what 'verified' and 'private' mean operationally.

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 13-word sentence, concise but without structure or separation of concerns. It is not verbose but lacks effectiveness in conveying information efficiently.

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 has three parameters and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what a DRP backup is, how parameters affect behavior, or provide context on file location/naming, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but does not explain any of the three parameters (output_file, idempotency_key, with_stills_and_luts). It only mentions 'backup' generically, adding no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verbs 'Save and export' and identifies the resource as a 'verified, private DRP backup'. It also adds a constraint ('without overwriting an existing file'), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like 'resolve_save_project' and 'resolve_export_timeline'.

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 the tool is for creating backups without overwriting, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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