csv_export_safe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses BOM insertion, quoting, Persian-digit conversion in numeric cells, formula-injection guarding, and corruption warnings. It still omits return shape, defaults for optional flags, and how delimiter/excelSafe toggles affect behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a colon and compact feature list. Every clause adds a concrete behavioral trait, and there is no padding.

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 description is appropriately rich about safety behavior, but for a four-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations it should also describe return format, optional parameter defaults, and delimiter/excelSafe semantics. It is adequate for choosing the tool but incomplete for invoking it precisely.

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 explain the four parameters. It implies `rows` and mentions BOM/Excel safety, but it does not explain `delimiter`, `bom`, or `excelSafe` as parameters, nor their defaults or effects. This is only partial compensation for a fully undocumented 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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Build Excel/Sheets-safe CSV from rows." It also names the output context (Excel/Sheets) and the key safety properties, so an agent can distinguish it from general formatting or Persian-text utilities.

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 usage context is implied by "Excel/Sheets-safe CSV from rows," but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative. The sibling list contains no direct CSV export tool, so the lack of alternatives is less harmful, but usage remains inferred rather than stated.

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