export_archimate_xml

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic function. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, what happens to the exported data, rate limits, or error conditions. The description is minimal and lacks essential context for a tool with complex parameters.

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, efficient sentence that states the core function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool with 3 complex parameters (including nested arrays and objects), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., file content, download link, status), error handling, or practical usage context. The minimal description leaves significant gaps given the tool's complexity.

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 all 3 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for adequate but not enhanced parameter documentation.

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 action ('Export') and resource ('ArchiMate model') with specific output format ('standard XML Open Exchange Format (.archimate)'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'generate_archimate_diagram' by focusing on export rather than diagram generation, but doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings like 'list_archimate_elements'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'generate_archimate_diagram' or 'validate_archimate_model'. The description implies usage for exporting models but doesn't specify prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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