linkedin_export_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so safety is covered. The description adds context about producing a structured file in different formats, but it does not clarify how the file is delivered (e.g., returned content vs. saved path) or any other behavioral details beyond that.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and purpose. It avoids unnecessary words and clearly communicates the tool's value proposition without redundancy.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, output formats, and typical use cases. It does not explain return value details, but that is less critical given the clear purpose and annotation coverage.

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 both parameters (format and identifier). The description mentions the file formats (JSON, CSV, Markdown) which aligns with the format parameter, but it adds little beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score 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 tool's function: 'Export a full profile to a structured file (JSON, CSV or Markdown)'. It specifies the resource (full profile) and the action (export), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_get_profile by emphasizing file output for downstream use.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: 'for downstream use — archiving, feeding another tool, or handing to a resume builder.' This implies using it when a file export is needed, but it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks direct exclusions.

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