wiki_export_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the formats and that file content is returned, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not elaborate on potential side effects, authentication needs, or response behavior beyond the output schema. The description is adequate but minimally informative.

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 very concise: a single sentence that conveys the core functionality. However, it omits necessary details such as parameter explanations, which would be valuable. The front-loading is good but the brevity sacrifices completeness.

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 an output schema, so return values need not be explained further. However, for a low-complexity export tool, the description misses contextual information like whether the operation is synchronous, any file size limits, or permission requirements. With sibling tools that are more descriptive, this one feels incomplete.

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 0%, meaning the description adds no explanation for the parameters doc_id and format. While the description mentions formats in the context of the tool's purpose, it does not describe the parameter 'format's default value ('md') or the meaning of 'doc_id'. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose: exporting a document to a specified format (md, pdf, html) and returning the file content. The verb 'export' and resource 'document' are specific, and the supported formats are listed, distinguishing it from siblings like wiki_get_document.

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 such as wiki_get_document. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts where export is appropriate, or when to avoid it. The description lacks exclusion criteria or alternative recommendations.

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