Export all collections from Outline wiki in Outline Markdown or JSON format for backup, migration, or external use.
Export all collections.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | outline-markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, what permissions are needed, how output is handled (e.g., file generation, download), or any rate limits. This leaves critical usage risks unaddressed.
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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loading the core action and target without any wasted text. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.
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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'export' entails (e.g., file output, data format), how results are returned, or any side effects, making it inadequate for safe and effective tool invocation in a complex environment with many sibling tools.
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 and only one parameter, the description doesn't add parameter details, but the low parameter count reduces the need for extensive compensation. The schema itself defines the 'format' parameter with enum values, so the baseline is high despite the description's lack of parameter information.
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 'Export all collections' clearly states the action (export) and target (all collections), which is better than a tautology. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'export_collection' or 'export_document', leaving ambiguity about scope and specificity.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'export_collection' for single collections or other export-related tools. The description implies a bulk operation but doesn't specify contexts or prerequisites for usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.