export

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the side effect of saving to a file and the default auto path (~/.cache/camoufox-research/exports/), but it does not mention overwrite behavior, file naming, directory creation, or what the tool returns after saving. This is useful but incomplete.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose and formats come first, then path behavior, then a clearly structured WHEN/NOT WHEN section. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return value details are not required. The description covers purpose, format choices, path handling, and exclusion cases. Minor gaps remain around file collision/overwrite behavior, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains data as the result from extract/crawl, clarifies that path can be custom or auto-defaulted, and enumerates allowed format values (json/csv/md). It does not describe the exact content expectations for the data string, but the key parameter semantics are meaningfully covered.

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 action ('save the result from extract/crawl to a file'), lists the resource and supported formats (json/csv/md), and explicitly contrasts itself with citation_report. This makes the tool's role clear and distinguishable from siblings.

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 includes explicit WHEN and NOT WHEN guidance: use it when the result is needed on disk, choose CSV for tables, JSON for automation, MD for reports; do not use it when the result should stay in conversation or when a campaign report is needed. It even names the alternative tool (citation_report).

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