export_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the core action and formats, without revealing whether the export includes secrets, whether it is read-only, what the output destination is, or any side effects.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler, and the core action and formats are front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful detail; the conciseness is good but not exemplary.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves important gaps: the meaning of includeSecrets, the scope of exported profiles, and output behavior are all unspecified. The tool is simple, but the definition is not complete enough for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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%, and the description mentions only the YAML/JSON formats, loosely mapping to the 'format' parameter. The 'includeSecrets' parameter is completely unexplained, so an agent cannot infer its meaning or default behavior from the description.

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 action ('导出' / export), the resource ('profiles'), and the output formats (YAML/JSON). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_table_csv and export_backup, though it does not specify whether all profiles or a selected subset are exported.

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 about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as export_backup or export_table_csv. The description implies a simple export action but offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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