ps_config_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It does not disclose if this is read-only, requires permissions, affects system state, has rate limits, or outputs format (e.g., file or data). This leaves critical gaps for a tool that exports configuration.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, clearly front-loading the purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters, making every word count.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple tool (0 params), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'export' entails (e.g., format, location, side effects) and behavioral context, which are necessary for safe and effective use, especially among siblings with config-related tools.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, earning a baseline 4 for not adding unnecessary info, though it could mention output semantics (not required per rules).

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 action ('Export') and resource ('current configuration'), specifying the purpose for backup. It distinguishes from siblings like ps_config_get (retrieve) and ps_config_import (import), but does not explicitly contrast them, making it a 4 rather than a 5.

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 provides minimal guidance by mentioning 'for backup,' implying use cases like saving settings. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use rules, alternatives (e.g., vs. ps_config_get for viewing), or prerequisites, leaving the agent with insufficient context for optimal selection.

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