export_cost_report_csv

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the tool exports to CSV and returns path and summary, but does not disclose whether the audit is run fresh or uses cached data, or any 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?

Description is short and front-loaded with purpose and usage. Every sentence adds value, but parameter information could be better structured (e.g., a separate list). No wasted words.

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?

With 3 parameters and no annotations, the description fails to explain top_n and regions. Also ambiguously says 'runs the full cost audit' which may overlap with sibling tool. Output schema exists but description only vaguely mentions return. Key context missing.

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 0%. Only output_path is explained in the description (with default format). The parameters top_n and regions are listed in schema but not described in the description, leaving their purpose unclear.

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 runs a full cost audit and exports to CSV, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'run_full_cost_audit' (audit only) and 'export_cost_report' (likely different format). It also provides usage triggers.

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?

Explicitly states when to offer the tool automatically (after run_full_cost_audit) and on specific user phrases. Does not provide negative guidelines (when not to use) but the use cases are clear and distinct.

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