export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It correctly implies a non-destructive read operation for backup, but lacks details on permissions, error conditions, or how the output file is handled. Filtering options are mentioned but not behavioral effects.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage context and filter options. No fluff or repetition. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

With 7 parameters, 0 required, and an output schema (not shown), the description covers purpose and usage context but omits output format, error handling, and side effects. For a backup/migration tool, this is moderately complete but could explain what the exported JSON contains.

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 0%. The description helps by listing 'filtering by project, type, tier, and date,' which maps to the project, type, tier, and since parameters. However, it does not explain format, include_embeddings, or output, leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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 'Export all memories and knowledge graph to a JSON file for backup or migration,' specifying the verb (export), resource (memories and knowledge graph), and format (JSON). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which perform a full 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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios: 'create a portable backup before risky operations, migrate data to another machine, or audit stored knowledge.' However, it does not mention when not to use or suggest alternatives like save_snapshot or snapshot, which are similar siblings.

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