neuron_recipe_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses a key boundary (memory/run history is never exported) and the optional learnings behavior, but it does not say what the export actually returns, where it goes, or whether any side effects occur.

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 tight sentences: the first states the deliverable and options, the second names the counterpart and the key exclusion. No filler or repeated schema content.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what is exported, what is optional, and what is never included, which is enough for correct selection and invocation. The only notable gap is the unstated output form/location.

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 some meaning by mapping include_learnings to 'optionally learnings' and identifying the exported files, but it does not materially deepen parameter semantics beyond 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?

Description names the exact verb and resource: exporting a recipe's shareable contents with a specific file list (agent.md, recipe.yaml, optionally learnings). It also names the reciprocal sibling (neuron_recipe_import), distinguishing this from the many other recipe and export tools.

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 frames this as the sharing/transfer mechanism and explicitly connects it to neuron_recipe_import, giving clear context for when it is the right tool. It does not enumerate exclusions or alternative conditions, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can route correctly.

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