Exports cookies associated with a specified profile.

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the JSON output format, but never clarifies whether cookies are returned inline or written to a file, nor what happens for an unknown profileId — a notable omission given readOnlyHint=false is unusual for what reads like a pure export.

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 sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is mildly redundant with the title's framing but still carries the intended-consuming use cases.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining the return, and 'JSON format' is only a partial answer — it does not say whether cookie data, a file path, or a download token comes back. Adequate for a two-parameter tool but leaves a real question open.

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% for both parameters, so profileId and workspaceId (including the -1 default) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra semantics beyond 'existing profile', 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?

Specific verb+resource: exporting cookies from an existing profile, with the output format (JSON) stated. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling cookie tools (import_cookies, copy_cookies), so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

'Can be used for backup or transfer purposes' describes the value of the output, not when to select this tool over import_cookies or copy_cookies, which are the obvious confusable siblings. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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