export_svg

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions a 'default path as export_pdf' but does not explain what that path resolves to, what happens when overwrite is false, or whether the operation modifies the document or only creates a file.

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 with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, though 'Default path as export_pdf' is terse and relies on knowledge of another tool.

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 an export tool with three parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. Key operational details such as overwrite behavior, which page is exported, and the actual default path are missing or only vaguely referenced.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented parameters. The only parameter-related hint is 'Default path as export_pdf,' which partially addresses 'path' but leaves 'page' and 'overwrite' entirely unexplained.

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 a specific action ('Export'), a resource ('the sheet'), and an output format ('SVG file'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like export_pdf, export_dxf, and export_ifc by naming SVG as the target format.

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 usage context is implied by the format name: use this tool when an SVG export is needed. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over export_pdf/export_dxf/export_ifc, nor does it describe any exclusions or prerequisites.

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