bundle_export

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this by clarifying that only the new bundle file is written and 'pack state is unchanged'. That is genuinely useful context beyond the annotation flags, though it does not cover auth needs or overwrite/error behavior.

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?

Two dense but efficient sentences, with the export contents front-loaded before the write-behavior caveat. Every clause earns its place; slightly long enumeration is the only cost.

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 no-output-schema export tool, the description covers what is written, where, and that pack state is untouched, which is sufficient for correct invocation. Minor omissions like overwrite/error semantics are already handled by the schema's outputPath description.

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, including the outputPath constraints and includeEvidence default. The description adds 'at outputPath' and 'optionally referenced evidence' but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Export) and enumerates the exact resources bundled (Task Passport, handoff, checkpoint, source conclusions, evidence) plus the output artifact (redacted agentpack.task-bundle JSON file). An agent can distinguish this from bundle_inspect and bundle_import without opening any schema.

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?

Conveys what gets exported and where it is written, implying a 'produce a shareable bundle' use case, but never states when to choose this over bundle_inspect or bundle_import. No explicit alternatives or prerequisites are given, so usage is only implied.

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