export_knowledge_by_id_api_v1_knowledge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'zip file containing .txt files' and 'Admin only,' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., if the export is destructive), whether it returns a direct download or a link, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. With zero annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action, but it is undersized for the information needed. It achieves conciseness at the expense of completeness, missing essential details like parameter semantics and output behavior.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should cover the parameter's meaning, return format, and any side effects. It provides the output format and permission, but lacks the id context and details like download mechanism, making it incomplete for a fully informed 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the 'id' parameter at all. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare parameter list, leaving the agent to guess what id to provide (e.g., knowledge base ID). This is a critical omission.

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 action ('Export') and resource ('a knowledge base'), and specifies the output format as a zip file containing .txt files. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like get_knowledge_by_id or update_knowledge_by_id, but could be more precise by mentioning the id parameter.

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 includes 'Admin only,' indicating a permission constraint, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_knowledge_by_id for viewing, update for modifying). There is no explicit when/when-not or context for selection.

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