export_context

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 mentions 'export' but fails to explain what that entails—whether it's a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, what the output format is, or any side effects. This leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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, straightforward sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly. It's appropriately sized for its content, though the brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 complexity implied by 5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover what 'export' means in practice, the parameter roles, or the expected output, leaving the agent with insufficient context for effective use.

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 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no information about any parameters. It doesn't explain what 'context', 'include_config', 'include_metadata', 'include_versions', or 'registry' mean or how they affect the export, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Export all subjects within a context' clearly states the action (export) and target (subjects within a context), but it's vague about what 'export' entails (e.g., format, destination, or purpose). It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'export_global' or 'export_subject', leaving ambiguity about scope and alternatives.

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 such as 'export_global' or 'export_subject'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases, offering no help in tool selection.

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