sd_export_package_sbsar

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds only 'export' and 'publication settings', which confirms file creation but does not disclose side effects like file overwrite, whether the source package is modified, or permission requirements. It adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), which is good for readability. However, it sacrifices necessary detail. It front-loads the main action but lacks structure or additional information. It is appropriately sized but not sufficiently informative.

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 9 required parameters, 0% schema coverage, and a complex export operation, the one-sentence description is severely incomplete. It does not describe return values (though output schema exists), parameter behaviors, or edge cases. The agent would need to guess many details.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It only says 'explicit publication settings', which is too vague to clarify any of the 9 required parameters. No parameter details, defaults, or constraints are given. The description fails to add meaning.

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 clearly states the verb 'export', the resource 'one saved package', and the target format '.sbsar'. It also mentions 'explicit publication settings', which matches the many boolean parameters. The tool is distinct from siblings like sd_save_package and node manipulation tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sd_save_package). It does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and context.

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