xbrl_export_dts

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds no behavioral contradictions and confirms it returns a JSON list, but does not provide additional behavioral context beyond what annotations and the return type convey.

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 (6 lines) with clear sections for Args and Returns, and no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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's simplicity (1 param, good annotations, output schema exists), the description covers the purpose, input, and output completely. No additional context is needed.

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 single parameter (filing_id) already has a description in the schema ('from xbrl_load_filing'). The description only repeats the parameter name without adding new semantics, so the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Export the Discoverable Taxonomy Set (DTS) document map' and lists what it contains (schemas, linkbases, instance documents). This clearly distinguishes it from many sibling export tools (e.g., xbrl_export_concepts, xbrl_export_csv) which export different data.

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 indicates when to use (when needing the DTS document map) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No sibling tool directly competes, so the purpose is clear, but no comparative guidance is given.

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