setup_export_mdm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context not present in the schema: the file is written server-side, requiring an absolute server path, and is intended for large datasets. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior, whether the setup must already exist, or what the tool returns or confirms after writing.

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 three concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose, key behavioral trait (server-side write), and critical parameter constraint are all front-loaded and each sentence adds value.

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 moderately simple export tool, the description covers the essential operation, parameter constraints, and a key behavioral detail. The lack of an output schema and annotations means a bit more would be helpful, such as overwrite semantics or return value, but the description is still largely sufficient for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, with descriptions for setup_path, file_path, and data_type. The tool description adds an important nuance beyond the schema by explicitly stating that file_path must be an absolute path on the server machine, clarifying that the path is interpreted server-side rather than client-side.

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 states a specific verb ('Export'), a clear resource ('Setup measurement or simulation data'), and the target format ('.mdm file'). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling setup_import_mdm, which performs the inverse operation.

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 gives clear context: it is for exporting setup data to an .mdm file on the server side, and is suitable for large datasets. It does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives, but no close alternative besides setup_import_mdm exists, so the context is sufficient.

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