export_crawl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions loading a saved crawl and exporting as CSV, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, failure modes (e.g., missing crawl), or whether it is idempotent. The behavior is implied but not fully transparent.

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 well-structured with Args and Returns sections. The default value for export_tabs is lengthy but necessary. Overall, it is concise without being terse.

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 complexity (4 params, 1 required, no enums) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all aspects: parameter explanations, default values, cross-references to other resources, and return value. It is complete for an export tool.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning: db_id is explained as coming from list_crawls, export_tabs includes default and reference to external resource, bulk_export and save_report have examples. This compensates well for the lack of schema 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 clearly states the verb 'export', the resource 'crawl data', and the output format 'CSV files'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like crawl_site (creation) and read_crawl_data (reading).

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 explains that db_id comes from list_crawls and suggests using read_crawl_data to read the results. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like read_crawl_data or how to decide between exporting vs direct reading.

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