superset_dataset_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses significant behavior: the result is a base64-encoded ZIP, includes dependencies, and returns a specific JSON structure with 'format', 'encoding', 'data', and 'size_bytes'. This is detailed and goes beyond a simple 'export' statement. However, it lacks information about potential side effects or permissions, which would be useful.

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 highly concise and well-organized with a summary, a note on encoding/import, and clear Args/Returns sections. Every sentence contributes useful information without fluff. It front-loads the main purpose and keeps the structure easy to scan.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter format, return format, and import compatibility. It does not mention potential errors or size limits, but these are not critical for a simple export tool. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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 schema only defines dataset_ids as a required string with no description. The description explains 'Comma-separated dataset IDs (e.g. "1,2,3")' in the Args section, adding critical semantic information about the parameter's format and expected values. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 states a specific action: 'Export datasets with dependencies (databases) to a ZIP file.' This clearly identifies the resource (datasets), the operation (export), and the output format (ZIP). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like superset_dashboard_export and superset_database_export by mentioning 'datasets' and 'dependencies'.

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 description mentions 'Can be imported via dataset_import,' which provides a complementary use case but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. It lacks guidance like 'Use this instead of X when...' so the usage context is clear but not fully explicit.

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