linkedin_auth_export_cookies

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

The description goes beyond annotations by warning that the output contains live session credentials and that anyone holding them can access the user's account. This is valuable security context not provided by the readOnlyHint or other annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two sentences with the purpose first, followed by a critical warning. Every sentence earns its place, no redundancy, and it is appropriately front-loaded.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential use case, security implications, and usage restriction. The output nature is inherently clear from the export purpose, and the schema handles the format details.

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 schema description coverage is 100% for the only parameter 'format', including its default behavior ('Defaults to cookie-editor'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema fully covers it, so a baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Export' and the resource 'currently loaded cookies', with a clear outcome (moved to another machine or backed up). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_auth_import_cookies (import), linkedin_auth_reload, and linkedin_auth_status.

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 provides an explicit usage condition: 'Only surface this when the user explicitly asks for it.' This is a clear when-to-use guideline. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternatives like the import tool, but the contrast is implied by naming and the export/import relationship.

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