export_json

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that the tool exports the full mindmap unchanged ('exact contents'). Though it does not explicitly mention that it is read-only or non-destructive, the verb 'Export' implies no modification, and the description adds sufficient clarity for a simple operation.

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 consists of two efficient sentences, each providing distinct value: the first states the action and output, the second lists use cases. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no wasted 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?

For a zero-parameter export tool with no output schema, the description is fully complete. It names the exact file exported, explains when to use it (backup, import, inspection), and implicitly distinguishes it from sibling export tools. No additional information is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke this tool.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (empty object). The description adds significant meaning beyond the schema by explaining what the output is ('raw JSON — the exact contents of mindmap.json') and offering concrete use cases, fulfilling the baseline expectation of 4 for zero-parameter tools and exceeding it with valuable context.

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 verb 'Export', the resource 'full mindmap as raw JSON', and distinguishes itself from sibling exporters by specifying 'raw JSON' and mentioning the exact file 'mindmap.json'. It also provides concrete use cases (backup, import, inspect), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: for backup, import into visualizer, or inspecting raw data. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with siblings, but the provided use cases and the context of different export formats imply appropriate usage. Clear context without exclusions.

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