Get Content Export

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

Even though annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, the description adds valuable context: the work flow states, URL expiry and the need to re-fetch, and the null attachment behavior. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand transient 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?

The description is concise, two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded. It efficiently covers the essential behavior without unnecessary verbosity.

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 status-checking tool, the description fully covers the relevant behavior: the states, the download link, expiry handling, and null attachment cases. With no output schema, the description explains what to expect, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, with both parameters (course_id and export_id) fully described in the schema. The description adds no new parameter-level information; it only mentions the export ID's source, which is already in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get the status of a content export' which specifies the verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings like list_content_exports (which lists exports) and create_content_export (which creates them) by focusing on a single export's status.

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?

Usage context is implied through the mention of 'export ID returned by create_content_export' in the schema, but the description doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like list_content_exports. It doesn't specify preconditions or exclusions, so guidance is not explicit.

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