export_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the high-level action without disclosing whether the export returns a file, downloads it, or has side effects. It also doesn't mention behavior for omitted optional parameters, making the actual behavior opaque.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action. It contains no redundant or unnecessary words, though it may be slightly too terse for full 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?

The tool has a simple schema but no output schema or annotations. The description is too minimal to fully contextualize the export operation—it doesn't explain the output format, how the optional parameters interact, or what the caller receives.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, such as the meaning of allowed formats or filter behavior.

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 a specific action ('Export') and resource ('translation data') with a scope ('in various formats'). It is distinct from sibling tools which are analysis, sync, and validation operations, so no confusion.

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 implies the tool is for exporting translation data but does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives. It lacks guidance on scenarios like backup, delivery, or integration, nor does it mention any prerequisites or when not to use it.

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