Export Story Manuscript

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects and return values. It states the output is a markdown file but does not mention whether this overwrites files, requires write permissions, or returns a path. It also omits that a story project must be set prior to export, leaving the agent without critical behavioral context.

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 entire description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the core purpose, output format, and contents in about 15 words, earning the maximum score.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is not complete. It fails to explain what the tool returns (e.g., success message, file path), requirements (active project), and edge cases. The provided information is enough for a basic understanding but insufficient for safe invocation.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'mục lục' (table of contents) overlaps with includeOutline, but its phrasing 'kèm mục lục' (with TOC) conflicts with the schema default of false for includeOutline. This inconsistency slightly confuses rather than adds value.

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 uses the specific verb 'Đóng gói và xuất bản' (package and publish) with the object 'toàn bộ tác phẩm' (entire work), making it clear this is an export tool. It distinguishes from siblings which are project management/analysis tools. The phrase 'file markdown hoàn chỉnh kèm mục lục và thông tin tác giả' specifies the output format precisely.

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 does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to use this tool over others, but the verb 'xuất bản' (publish) clearly implies an export use case. Among sibling tools focused on project configuration, analysis, and refactoring, the export purpose is unambiguous. However, it lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites such as an initialized project.

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