export_collection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool exports requests in native JSON format to a .atm/ directory, which is portable, but does not mention behavior like overwriting existing files, required permissions, or what the output structure looks like.

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, well-formed sentence that conveys the main action, output format, target directory, and portability. No superfluous information, efficiently structured.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description does not fully equip an agent to use the tool. It omits details about whether the export produces a single file or folder, how to use the import counterpart, and what happens if the output directory exists. For a tool with multiple sibling export tools, more context is needed.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (tag and output_dir). The description adds that the format is native JSON and the default output is .atm/, but these are already captured in the schema descriptions. No additional semantic meaning is provided beyond what is in the schema.

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 saved requests in native JSON format to a portable .atm/ folder. It distinguishes from sibling tools like export_curl or export_environment by specifying the target format and portability, but does not explicitly mention 'collection' in the text, slightly reducing clarity.

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 implies usage for moving requests between projects (cópiala a otro proyecto para importar), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative export tools, nor does it provide guidance on when not to use it.

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