remove_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies destructive actions (cancellation and file deletion) but does not mention consequences, permissions required, reversibility, or error handling. For example, it doesn't state what happens if a wrong type is chosen or if the request ID is invalid.

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 conveys the two main actions efficiently. No unnecessary words or repetition, making it easy to parse.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the core functionality. However, it omits information about return values, error cases, or side effects (e.g., whether the file is permanently deleted). This leaves gaps for an AI agent to handle edge cases.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by linking the 'cancel' and 'delete' type values to the export's state (pending vs. completed), which helps the agent understand the parameter's impact.

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 verb ('Cancel' or 'delete') and the resource ('export'), and distinguishes two distinct use cases (pending vs. completed). This is specific and unambiguous, setting it apart from query tools like get_export_status or retrieve_export.

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 explains when to use the tool (for pending or completed exports) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives. For example, it could mention that checking status should use get_export_status, or that request_export_report creates the export. This lack of exclusion guidance reduces clarity.

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