agent_export_subagents

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description says it 'generates and exports' templates and the sole parameter is a target_dir described as 'Directorio destino para guardar los archivos de configuración' (destination directory to save the config files). Writing files to disk is a mutation of the environment, directly contradicting the read-only hint.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words that names the output artifact and its destinations. It is efficient, though the compressed phrasing leaves the read/write nature ambiguous.

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?

With no output schema and one optional parameter, the description covers the output destinations well, but it never clarifies the write/export side effects (file creation, overwriting, permissions) that matter most for a tool touching the filesystem, leaving a meaningful 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 description coverage is 100% for the single optional target_dir parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description adds no extra parameter meaning (no defaults, formats, or overwrite behavior), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb pair (generates and exports) and a concrete resource (legal subagent templates and profiles), naming the exact target formats/paths (.claude/agents/*.md, .cursor/rules/*.mdc). This is clearly distinguishable in intent from siblings like agent_list or agent_run, though it never explicitly contrasts itself against 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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing guidance. The description only says what the tool produces, leaving the agent to infer the triggering context on its own.

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