pennylane_create_agl_export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write/non-idempotent profile is known. The description adds the genuinely non-obvious trait that the operation is asynchronous and requires a separate retrieval call, which is real context beyond the annotations; it stops short of covering duplicate-export behavior or permissions.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core action stated first and the async follow-up second. Every clause earns its place.

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 not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description completes the picture by documenting the async create-then-fetch flow; only minor gaps remain around the mode parameter's practical effect and whether repeated calls create separate exports.

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 100%, with mode, period_start and period_end all documented in the schema itself (including the 'in_line'/'in_column' values), so the baseline is 3. The description only implies period scoping and adds no syntax or constraint detail 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?

States a specific verb (Crée) and resource (export Grand Livre Analytique) scoped to a period, and explicitly names the sibling pennylane_get_agl_export, so an agent can distinguish creation from retrieval without opening either schema.

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?

Gives clear workflow context: the export is asynchronous, so the caller must follow up with pennylane_get_agl_export to obtain the file. It does not state when NOT to use it (e.g. versus pennylane_create_fec_export) or any prerequisites, but the follow-up routing is explicit.

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