export_report_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is established. The description adds that it exports 'raw table data' as 'structured JSON', but doesn't disclose additional behavioral details like pagination or field handling beyond what the schema provides.

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?

A single sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose and output format. No redundant wording, front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 straightforward read-only nature, the schema covering all parameter details, and the annotations providing safety context, the description is sufficient. It could benefit from mentioning the default limit or the fact that 'raw' implies unprocessed records, but overall it's complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 the parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no new semantic detail about the parameters themselves, only a general context of raw data export.

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 'Export', the resource 'raw table data', and the output format 'structured JSON' with a purpose ('for use in external reports'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_records or generate_report, which return data for different purposes.

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 phrase 'for use in external reports' provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it stops short of full guidance.

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