nx_export_pdf

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

With no annotations, the description does disclose a genuinely important behavioral trait: the export follows the *current* display, and passing sheet_name mutates that display state before exporting. However, it says nothing about whether an existing file at path is overwritten, what permissions or file-extension expectations apply, or what happens on failure — significant gaps for a file-writing operation with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the one caveat that matters. No filler, no restating of the name or schema.

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 return values need no explanation here. Combined with the useful sheet_name semantics and the sibling pointer, the definition covers most of what an agent needs; only the 'path' destination behavior is left entirely to inference.

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 both parameters. The description adds real meaning for sheet_name (it activates that sheet before export, not a passive filter), but 'path' is never explained — no hint about destination semantics, extension, or overwrite behavior despite being the only required parameter.

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 resource ('Export the current drawing display to a PDF file') and implicitly distinguishes itself from the format-specific sibling nx_export_step. An agent can tell immediately what the tool produces and from what source scope (the current display, not the whole model).

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to pass sheet_name to display a particular sheet first, and points to nx_list_drawing_sheets to discover valid names — a real routing instruction. It stops short of stating when NOT to use this tool (e.g., STEP export via nx_export_step) or prerequisites for export.

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