export_claude_md

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states what the document includes, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, if it requires permissions, or any side effects (e.g., file creation location). The read-only nature of an export can be inferred, but is not explicit.

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 sentence that front-loads the key action and output contents. It is concise and free of filler, though it could be expanded with parameter details without sacrificing conciseness.

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 only one optional parameter and no output schema, the description should clarify output format, destination (e.g., file vs. string), and limitations. It lacks these details, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 single parameter 'max_constraints' is not described in the description, and the schema has no description or examples (0% coverage). The description fails to explain how this parameter affects output, leaving the agent to guess its purpose.

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 a specific verb ('Generate') and clearly names the resource ('CLAUDE.md document from the knowledge graph'), listing concrete contents (top constraints, recent decisions, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_constraints or get_decision_log, which focus on individual components.

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 vs alternatives such as get_constraints, get_decision_log, or get_health_report. The description implies it is for generating a summary document, but does not specify scenarios or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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