getBdd

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation via 'Exports' but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, require permissions, or handle invalid caseId. Adequate but could be more explicit about side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no redundancy. It conveys the core action, format, and required input efficiently.

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 simple export tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it does and what input is needed. Could mention that the output is a file or provide error handling hints, but sufficient.

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%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema by restating the parameter's purpose. The 'REQUIRED' emphasis is helpful but already in schema's 'required' array.

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 BDD test case as a .feature file in Gherkin format, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like addBdd (which adds) and getCase (which retrieves case details) by focusing on export.

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 the required parameter caseId but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getCase for viewing, addBdd for creating). No exclusions or context on prerequisites.

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