Export survey responses

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the output is base64-encoded and references the specific RPC method. No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise with two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence clearly states the primary action and output format.

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 high schema coverage and existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and output format. It does not detail the base64 document structure, but that is acceptable with an output schema.

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 very high (91%), so the baseline is 3. The description does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema, merely stating the overall purpose.

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 responses as a base64-encoded document. It specifies the underlying RPC method and notes authentication details. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like limesurvey_export_responses_by_token, leaving some ambiguity.

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 only authentication instructions, stating the agent should not provide a session key. There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., export_responses_by_token, export_statistics) or any prerequisites like survey activation.

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