maltego_export_json

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, but description describes it as a non-destructive export. This contradiction confuses the agent about potential side effects. No mention of file overwriting or other destructive behavior.

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?

Two-sentence overview plus a concise Args section. Every sentence provides necessary information 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?

Covers purpose and usage adequately for a simple tool, but the annotation contradiction introduces uncertainty. Output schema not shown but mentioned as existing; description confirms return value.

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?

Description restates the parameter name and purpose, but the schema already includes a nearly identical description. Minimal added value; baseline score appropriate given high schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states action (export), resource (full active graph), and output format (JSON). Distinguishes from sibling export tools (CSV, report) and mentions it's a superset of .mtgx sidecars.

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?

States it's useful for downstream tooling that doesn't read Maltego files, implying when to use. Lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use but context is clear.

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