Export Grok Session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the output format (Markdown) and the purpose, but does not disclose behaviors like truncation via max_chars or error handling. With annotations present, this modest addition merits a 3.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and output format, with no unnecessary words. It earns every word and stays compact.

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 export tool with strong annotations, the description covers the core function and return format. It could be more complete by explaining max_chars behavior and edge cases, but it is largely sufficient for selection and invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only implies the role of session_id via 'a Grok session transcript' and never mentions max_chars or its effect on the output. The agent is left to infer the meaning of max_chars from the schema's min/max/default values, which is insufficient.

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 uses a specific verb ('Export'), identifies the resource ('a Grok session transcript'), and specifies the output format ('as Markdown'). It also states the intended purpose ('so another ChatGPT session can inspect prior delegated work'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like grok_list or grok_cancel.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to share a Grok session transcript with another ChatGPT session. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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