export_batch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what each operation does and adds a useful behavior: per-item success reporting so one bad layer does not hide the rest. It does not cover overwrite behavior or return details, but the core write behaviors are disclosed.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with 'Batch export,' and every sentence adds distinct value: scope, operation details, and error-reporting behavior. No fluff or repetition.

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?

The description explains operations and success reporting, and parameter schemas are complete, but it never clarifies which parameters are required for each operation, how dpi and dpis relate, or what the return/report format looks like. Given no output schema and no annotations, this is a clear gap.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds meaningful semantics for the operation parameter by listing the valid values and their effects, which the schema itself defers to the tool summary.

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 names the tool's function ('Batch export') and specifies the two operation modes with concrete behavior, which also helps distinguish it from the single-file siblings like export_file and export_preview.

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 context of batch export is clear and operation descriptions imply usage, but the description never explicitly tells the agent when to choose this tool over export_file or export_preview, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

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