Export Query Results

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that this is a SELECT-based export and that it writes to a local file, but it does not mention whether existing files are overwritten, whether directories are created, or any other side effects or limitations.

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, well-structured sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and includes both the destination and supported formats without wasting words.

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 description is minimally sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool: it identifies the query type, the output formats, and the fact that results go to a local file. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it lacks behavioral context like file overwrite semantics or how this compares to returning query results directly.

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 schema already documents all four parameters clearly. The description adds little beyond reinforcing that the output is JSON or CSV and the file is local, which is already captured by the schema. Baseline 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 names a specific action—execute a SELECT query—and a distinct resource outcome: exporting results to a local file as JSON or CSV. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like query or execute, which return results rather than writing files.

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 should be used when file export is needed, but it does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as query, query_paginated, or multi_query, nor does it state when not to use it. The usage context is inferable but not explicit.

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