Export a report

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive safety, so the description's value is in adding that it writes a file locally, can transform to CSV/JSON, and that Booksy builds can exceed a minute. That last point is genuinely useful scheduling context beyond structured data.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and ending with the timing caveat. No wasted phrasing, though the CSV/JSON sentence slightly restates the schema enum.

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?

For a 7-parameter tool with nested filters and no output schema, the description covers the main behaviors, prerequisites, and latency. It could say more about how filters interact with report type, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the output enum and filters. The description reinforces format options and report_key sourcing but adds little beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (downloads/exports any report the panel offers) plus the output modes (file, CSV, JSON). An agent can distinguish it from inline data tools like stats_report and from report_export_batch based on the save-to-disk framing.

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?

Provides the key prerequisite (report keys come from stats_report_catalog) and a latency warning, but never explicitly states when to choose this over stats_report or report_export_batch. Usage is implied rather than contrasted with alternatives.

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