export_search_results

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., file overwrite), required permissions, error handling, or any constraints beyond parameter descriptions. The simple 'Export...' lacks critical behavioral context.

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: one lead sentence followed by a bullet list. It is front-loaded and avoids fluff. Minor improvements could include grouping or clarifying option restrictions.

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 8 parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks context about search prerequisites, output behavior, and potential edge cases. Having an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but overall context is thin.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential meaning for each parameter (e.g., 'Output file path (e.g., "C:/results.txt")', 'Export format: txt, csv, json...'). However, it omits default values and format-specific details, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool's verb and resource: 'Export search results to a file.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools that search or retrieve file info, as it specifically focuses on exporting.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_files or get_file_info. There is no mention of prerequisites, preferred use cases, or limitations.

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