export_guion

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It details what the HTML report includes (summary table, collapsible sections), but does not disclose side effects like overwriting output_html, required file format for guion.json, or error behavior. It is not misleading, but it lacks depth on behavioral traits.

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 concise and well-structured with a summary sentence, a bulleted list of generated content, and a clear Parameters section. Every sentence adds value, with no waste 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?

For a simple tool with two string parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: input, output file, and report contents. It does not explain return values, but since the tool generates a file, that is implied. Minor gap: no mention of what happens if the output file already exists.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly defines guion_path as 'path to guion.json' and output_html as 'path to write the .html file', adding semantic meaning beyond the bare schema properties. While brief, it clearly explains the purpose of each parameter.

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 'Render guion.json to a self-contained, navigable HTML report' with a specific verb (render) and resource (guion.json), and elaborates on the output contents. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like full_report or save_identification_report.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of similar tools like full_report or save_identification_report, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The user is left to infer that this tool is for exporting a standalone HTML report.

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