export_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the export action and input source, but does not disclose what the tool returns (e.g., file download, base64, URL), any side effects, permissions, or failure modes. This is a significant gap for a tool with no output schema.

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 core purpose and then provides one crucial instruction. No filler words or redundant information; every word earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity (4 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core functionality and input source but omits details about the response/return value and post-export behavior. This leaves the agent uncertain about what to do after invoking the tool.

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%, providing clear parameter descriptions. The description adds value by specifying that 'content' should be the Markdown output from generate_document, which clarifies the expected composition and origin beyond the schema's generic 'Document content in Markdown'.

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 action ('Export a compliance document') and the resource ('compliance document') with specific output formats ('PDF or DOCX format'). It distinguishes from siblings: generate_document creates documents, list_document_types lists them, while export_document exports them.

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?

It provides clear usage context by specifying that the content must come from generate_document, which implies a workflow ordering. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternative tools, leaving some inference needed.

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