export_collection

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations: it discloses that the export is asynchronous, may take time, returns operation status, and that the file is accessible via Outline's UI. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which are consistent with the description.

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 well-structured with a concise introductory sentence, an important async note, a bullet list of use cases, and clear args/returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and the information is front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, async behavior, parameter details, and returns information. Given the output schema exists (not shown but referenced), the description sufficiently explains the return value as operation info and file access. No gaps for an expert user.

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 provides clear meaning for both parameters: collection_id is the ID to export, and format specifies the export format ('outline-markdown', 'json', or 'html') with a default. Since the input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), the description fully compensates and clarifies parameter roles and options.

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 all documents in a collection to a downloadable file, and lists specific use cases (backup, share, convert, archive). It distinguishes from sibling tools like export_document (single document) and export_all_collections (all collections), making its purpose specific and differentiated.

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 context for when to use the tool (backup, sharing, conversion, archiving) and notes the asynchronous nature. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare directly to alternatives like export_document, which would further enhance guidance.

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