Export circuit

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral context. It clearly indicates the tool produces either Falstad text or SVG, but it does not disclose whether the export returns content directly, creates a file, or has any side effects. Some useful behavior is stated, but meaningful context is missing.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and its two output formats without redundancy. Every word contributes meaning.

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 tool is simple, with one optional parameter, so extensive documentation is not required. However, since there is no output schema, the description does not clarify what the tool returns or how the exported content is delivered, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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?

While the schema already documents the 'format' enum and default, the description enriches the enum values by explaining that 'text' means Falstad text format and 'svg' means a drawing of the schematic. This adds value beyond the bare parameter name and enum list.

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 names a specific verb ('Export'), the resource ('the current circuit'), and two concrete output formats ('Falstad text format' or 'SVG drawing'). It is clear and informative, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like screenshot or circuit_link.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as screenshot or circuit_link. The description states what it does but not in what situations it is preferred, nor what it is not for.

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