export_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the operation is read-only, specifies the response as a GPX 1.1 XML string, and avoids implying side effects. It does not describe failure behavior for an invalid route ID, but this is minor for a simple read-only export.

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?

Three concise sentences, each adding useful information: what the tool does, where the output is applicable, and how to obtain a valid input. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 one-parameter, read-only export tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives enough to select and use it correctly: target resource, output format, input source, and safe behavior. It could mention error outcomes, but that is not essential for initial invocation.

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?

The schema already documents routeId as 'Route ID returned by list_routes.' The description adds a similar hint, but no significant new semantic value beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Exports') with a clear resource ('a saved Suunto route') and names the output format ('GPX 1.1 XML string'). It is also implicitly differentiated from the sibling export_workout_gpx, which targets workouts rather than routes.

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 explicitly instructs the agent to use list_routes to discover valid route IDs and states that the export is suitable for import into navigation apps. It does not explicitly enumerate when to choose this over export_workout_gpx, but the route/workout distinction makes the appropriate context clear.

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