export_messages

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

Discloses that only messages already in the local store are included, and that messages never received on this device are absent. Does not explicitly state read-only nature, but operation is clearly non-destructive. No annotations present to contradict.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and includes necessary details. Slightly verbose but every sentence serves a purpose. Could be tightened slightly without losing clarity.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers return value characteristics (JSON vs CSV format, field preservation). All three parameters are explained with practical usage context. No gaps in understanding for an agent.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds value by explaining that recipient restricts to one conversation, since uses ISO 8601, and that JSON preserves all fields while CSV is flat. This goes beyond the bare schema descriptions.

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 exports locally stored messages as JSON/CSV for archiving, analysis, or migration. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_conversation and search_messages by specifying its batch export use case.

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?

Explicitly says when to use ('full or filtered dump of conversation history in machine-readable form') and when not to use ('Do NOT use to read individual messages interactively'), naming specific alternatives (get_conversation, search_messages).

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