collections_export_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without explaining output format, side effects, permissions, or any potential limitations (e.g., performance impact). This is a minimal statement of intent, not a transparency disclosure.

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 a single, concise sentence that is easy to parse and front-loads the key action. It contains no waste, though it could benefit from slightly more context while still remaining concise.

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 the simplicity of zero parameters, the description is still incomplete because it does not specify what the export output looks like (e.g., file format, collection data structure) or any constraints (e.g., whether all collections includes trashed ones). The lack of an output schema and annotations amplifies this gap, making it difficult for an agent to know how to handle the result.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides full coverage (100%) by default. The description does not need to explain any parameter semantics, earning a baseline of 4. No additional compensation is needed.

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 'Export all collections' uses a specific verb ('export') and identifies the resource ('collections') with an explicit scope ('all'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'collections_export', which likely handles individual collections, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or cases where a different tool should be chosen, leaving the agent without decision support.

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