db_export

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is read-only ('只读操作') and refuses to overwrite existing paths ('拒绝覆盖已存在路径'), which are important behavioral traits. However, it does not mention error behavior, path handling, or output structure, so it falls short of a 5.

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 that front-loads the purpose and then adds two key behavioral constraints. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or repetition.

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 simple export tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and key constraints. However, it lacks parameter semantics and usage guidance, which are important for an agent to use the tool correctly. Given the tool's simplicity, the gaps are not critical, but they prevent a perfect score.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage and no enums. The description only implies that 'format' supports JSON/CSV by mentioning those formats, but it does not explain the 'path' parameter, its default, or the exact allowed values. This leaves significant ambiguity for both parameters.

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's purpose with a specific verb and resource: '导出数据库为 JSON/CSV' (Export database to JSON/CSV). It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like db_import_apply and file_scan by explicitly framing it as an export operation.

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 alternatives. The description mentions the tool is read-only and refuses to overwrite existing paths, but these are constraints rather than usage guidance. There are no explicit exclusions or alternative tool references.

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