Record pre-export baseline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; 'no media changes' largely restates that. The useful additions are the workflow link to verify_export and the purpose of rejecting unchanged files, but nothing is said about persistence or whether the checkpoint expires.

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 compact clauses, front-loaded with the action and the timing constraint; nothing is padded. The trailing fragment 'no media changes' is clipped but not harmful.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and workflow but leaves the sole input undefined and only implies that a checkpoint_id is produced. An agent can guess the call but not the correct value for 'path'.

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?

The single parameter 'path' has 0% schema description coverage and the description never explains it — no indication of whether it is an output file, a directory, or a studio project path. Worse, the description names 'checkpoint_id', which is not a parameter of this tool at all, so an agent may look for it in the schema and find nothing.

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 concrete verb and resource — 'Record exact output baseline before Export' — which is specific enough to distinguish it from studio_verify_export and studio_import_media. It falls short of 5 because 'baseline' and 'checkpoint' are never defined in terms of what is actually captured.

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 timing guidance ('before Export') and names the downstream consumer, verify_export, so the agent knows the lifecycle pairing. It does not state what happens if a checkpoint already exists or whether the step is optional.

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