Export server blueprint

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint false (supports writes via save_as) and destructiveHint false (no destructive actions). The description confirms this by explaining the snapshot process and optional save, adding context about permission decompilation.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and key features. No wasted words.

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?

Covers main purpose and optional save, but doesn't describe the return value when not saved or prerequisites (e.g., bot permissions). Lacks some completeness given no output schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds slight nuance for save_as ('straight to the store') but doesn't meaningfully expand beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 it snapshots a live server into a blueprint, listing specific elements (roles, categories, channels, visibility, permissions). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_blueprint or diff_blueprint.

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?

The description implies usage for exporting server structure and optionally saving. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives (e.g., when to use save_blueprint instead), but the context from siblings makes the purpose clear.

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