notebook_export_script

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

Without annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'best-effort deterministic', hinting at unreliability, but omits details like file output behavior, idempotency, or potential side 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence without redundancy. However, it may be too terse, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 tool's simplicity and an output schema, the description covers core purpose but fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to understand its role among siblings or usage nuances.

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 should explain parameters. It does not describe 'path' (despite being inferable from name) or 'include_markdown_as_comments' (though self-explanatory), leaving the agent without explicit semantic guidance.

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 tool exports notebook code to a Python script with the qualifier 'best-effort deterministic', making its primary purpose distinct from sibling tools like notebook_analyze or notebook_rerun_plan.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other sibling tools (e.g., notebook_analyze, notebook_context). The description lacks context for appropriate use cases or alternatives.

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