neurogenesis__export_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions portability and recreation, but does not address side effects (e.g., read-only nature), safety, permissions, output format, or constraints. This leaves gaps for an agent to infer behavior correctly.

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 short but contains a verbose parenthetical about the neurogenesis system that adds little tool-specific value. It could be more concise by directly stating the action and counterpart without the system context.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter documentation and behavioral details. It is not fully complete; an agent would need additional context to use it confidently.

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 sole parameter agent_id receives no description in the description or schema (0% coverage). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to guess its format or semantics. This is a significant gap for a required parameter.

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 states the tool exports a 'portable state document for an agent' and explicitly links to import_state as the counterpart, clearly identifying the action and resources involved. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on state export vs. import or other operations.

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 usage by mentioning import_state and self-hosted environments, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like describe_agent or delete_agent. The context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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