export_pdf

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

The description claims to 'export a node... to a single PDF file on disk', which is a write operation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. This is a direct contradiction. Additionally, it does not disclose whether the tool overwrites files or requires permissions, leaving critical behavioral gaps.

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 very concise: two sentences totaling under 200 characters, with the main action front-loaded. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy, earning its place.

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 no output schema, the description explains return values (path null, empty:true) and limitations (pagination, performance). It lacks details on error conditions or overwrite behavior, but for a tool with relatively simple inputs, it is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining that nodeId is optional and omitting it exports the current page, and that path is null if the target is missing or not exportable. This extra context compensates well 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 tool exports a node to a single PDF file on disk, specifies the one-page-per-node behavior, and distinguishes it from potential alternatives like screenshots. It explicitly says it cannot paginate or combine nodes, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to pass a nodeId (frame/section) vs omit for current page, and warns about slow performance for large pages. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool in favor of siblings like get_screenshot or save_screenshots, though the context implies it.

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