roadmap_export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to cover safety. It adds behavioral context by stating the output is a single concatenated markdown document and that includeContent=false yields structure only, which is useful beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Two sentences with no redundant phrases. It efficiently communicates the tool's function and key parameter behaviors without wasting words.

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?

For a read-only export tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the output format and key options. It could explicitly mention when to use this instead of related tools, but given the sibling context, the 'entire roadmap' phrasing is adequate.

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 schema already explains all four parameters. The description's mention of includeContent and maxTopics essentially repeats the schema descriptions without adding new semantic details. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the description doesn't provide value beyond the schema.

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 action ('Export'), resource ('an entire roadmap'), and output form ('a single markdown document'). It also explains the concatenation of all topics' content, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like roadmap_get or roadmap_topic that likely return single items.

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 implies when to use this tool ('Export an entire roadmap') and provides conditional usage for parameters ('includeContent=false returns structure only; maxTopics caps the count'). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a perfect 5, but the context is clear.

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