import_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether the import overwrites or appends data, or any destructive potential. The only behavioral detail is auto-detection of files.

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 very concise with four sentences, no redundant information, and the core purpose is stated first. Every sentence adds value.

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 there is an output schema (not shown), return values are assumed covered. However, the description lacks details on import behavior (e.g., merge vs replace, success/failure conditions) and prerequisites (file permissions, directory existence). It is adequate but not 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining the parameter as a path or empty for auto-detection, and specifying the file type (.xlsx). This provides useful context 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?

The description clearly states the tool imports a MacroFactor .xlsx file into the database, distinguishing it from all sibling tools that are read-only, analysis, or synchronization operations.

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?

It explains supported formats (Quick Export and All-Time Data) and the auto-detection feature when filename is empty, providing context for usage. However, it does not specify when not to use the tool or compare to alternatives.

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