Diagnostic Export

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that this is a write operation and produces a diagnostic package, which is genuinely useful. However, it omits permissions/auth requirements, expected size or duration of the export (relevant for large log bundles), and whether sensitive data is included.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It states action, target, and a key behavioral note compactly.

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. But for a six-parameter write operation with no annotations, the description is thin: it lacks usage context, the relationship to diagnostic_stop, and enough behavioral detail to call it fully complete.

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%, so all six parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond noting the local output directory, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb+resource+destination: exports NAS diagnostic logs to a local directory. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling diagnostic_stop.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling diagnostic_stop as an alternative or follow-up. The agent is left to infer when to invoke this vs other diagnostic or logging tools.

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