Export to compendium

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that duplicate ids are overwritten, locked compendiums are refused unless unlockIfNeeded is set, and the lock is restored afterwards. It also describes the output summary (new, overwritten, skipped, lost), giving an agent a clear picture of side effects and results.

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 four sentences with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct behavioral detail (selection, overwrite, lock handling, result listing).

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 no output schema, the description enumerates the answer categories and covers edge cases like duplicates and locks. For a moderately complex write operation, all essential behavior an agent needs to call and interpret results is documented.

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 input schema already describes every parameter fully (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the interplay between names, folderName, and omission (fallback to all documents of the type), as well as case-insensitive name matching. This is helpful but not extensive.

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 copies documents from the world into a compendium for archiving finished material. The specific verb and resource are unmistakable, and the direction distinguishes it from the sibling import-from-compendium.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (archiving finished material) and explains the selection modes (by name/id, folder, or everything). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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