Export CSV

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false, but the description adds real behavioral detail: UTF-8 BOM for Excel/Sheets, RFC 4180 quoting, a formula-injection guard, suppression exclusion unless include_suppressed=true, refusal to overwrite without overwrite=true, and no upload. The overwrite-refusal behavior in particular is exactly the kind of destructive-safety contract annotations cannot express.

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?

Five short, front-loaded sentences that each convey a distinct fact (format, selection, encoding safety, suppression default, overwrite/upload behavior). No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 6-parameter, no-output-schema tool with zero required params, it covers output format, safety behavior, and selection semantics well. The gap is what path and columns accept or default to, which matters for correct invocation.

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 carry the burden. It explains list, prospect_ids, overwrite, and include_suppressed semantics well, but says nothing about the path or columns parameters, leaving 2 of 6 parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 ('Export prospects to a ... CSV') and immediately names the selection modes (list or prospect_ids). It is clearly distinguishable from every sibling, which list, search, enrich, or push data rather than writing a local export file.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies: exporting prospects by list or by prospect_ids, with suppressed prospects excluded by default. However, it never names an alternative or a when-not condition (e.g. use sdr_list_prospects first to inspect, or that free/local means no sync occurs) beyond the implicit 'does not upload anything'.

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