maltego_export_report

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true. The description adds that the tool writes to a file and is deterministic, but does not elaborate on overwrite behavior or other side effects beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently organized with parameter details in a clear list. Every sentence adds value 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?

The description, together with annotations and output schema, provides a thorough understanding of the tool's behavior. It could mention overwrite semantics explicitly, but overall it is sufficiently complete for effective usage.

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 description adds value beyond the input schema by explaining the path-format convention (.md for markdown, .html for HTML) and linking to the sibling tool's content. This compensates for any lack of schema description coverage (0% stated, though schema has descriptions).

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 writes a deterministic investigation report to a file, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool maltego_generate_report by specifying that this one writes the same content to a path.

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 guidance on when to use this tool (when you need to write the report to a file) and compares it to maltego_generate_report, which does not write to a file. It also explains the path extension convention for format selection, but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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