Workbooks Export Report

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, which tells the agent this is a non-destructive but potentially state-changing operation. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: it never says whether the export is synchronous, where the artifact lands, whether it is a file download or a URL, or what auth is required. No annotation contradiction, but minimal added context.

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?

Two very short, front-loaded fragments with zero padding. The 'format:' fragment is slightly telegraphic and lacks a verb, but it is readable and wastes no space.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for an export tool with several near-identical siblings, the description omits the destination/mechanism of the export and any routing guidance, leaving gaps an agent must guess at.

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% and the format property has no enum in the schema, so the description's enumeration of 'pdf', 'png', 'csv', 'xlsx' is genuinely useful compensating information. However, report_id (the only required parameter) is not described at all, and no default behavior for format is mentioned in the description.

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?

"Export a report" gives a verb and a resource, but it essentially restates the tool name (workbooks_export_report) and adds nothing about scope. It does not distinguish this from close siblings like workbooks_export_workbook, workbooks_export_and_download, or workbooks_download_query_export, which an agent must choose between.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative, despite the tool sitting in a cluster of four export/download siblings. The agent is left to infer when a report export is preferable to workbooks_export_workbook or workbooks_export_and_download.

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