export_ed_lessons

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

With only readOnlyHint=false supplied, the description carries most of the burden and does well: it discloses that a zip file is written to the local Downloads folder, that it returns the zip path, and that only already-synced lessons are included. It omits overwrite behavior, file naming, and what happens if nothing has been synced yet.

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?

Two short clauses plus a return-value sentence, with the action, destination, and usage condition front-loaded. Every sentence carries information and there is no padding.

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?

For a two-parameter export tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, where output goes, and what is returned. Missing edge-case behavior (unsynced course, existing zip, large courses) keeps it short of complete.

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 100%, so both parameters (course and module) are already documented, including examples. The description's mention of packaging 'by week' loosely relates to the module parameter but adds no syntax or constraint beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it packages a course's already-synced Ed Lessons into a zip and saves it to the user's Downloads folder. The scope is narrow and understandable ('whole course courseware'), which implicitly contrasts with the per-lesson sibling get_ed_lessons, though that sibling is never named.

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?

It gives a clear usage trigger: 'use when the user wants the whole course's courseware'. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative, so an agent must infer that per-lesson reading belongs to get_ed_lessons.

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