export_gerber

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

Annotations already indicate openWorldHint and destructiveHint, so the agent knows this tool has side effects. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context—no mention of file overwriting, directory creation, or impact on current project state. It merely restates the tool's basic function without enriching beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and object with no filler. It is concise and easy to parse, making it efficient for an agent to quickly understand the basic operation.

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 two optional parameters and a destructive hint, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how the tool selects layers or where output goes, and it fails to clarify the default behavior. The existing annotations and output schema do not compensate for the missing param semantics and usage guidance.

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 input schema has two parameters (layers, output_subdir) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what layers represents, what values are valid, or how output_subdir is used. The agent is left to infer parameter semantics from names alone, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 exports Gerber manufacturing files, with a specific verb ('Export') and resource ('Gerber manufacturing files'). This distinguishes it from sibling export tools like export_drill, export_bom, or export_netlist. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as export_manufacturing_package or export_ipc2581. It does not mention prerequisites, typical workflows, or situations where a different export tool would be more appropriate.

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