export_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the export behavior and format options but lacks details on side effects (e.g., no modification to history), permission requirements, or performance considerations. Adequate but could be more transparent.

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 sentence of eight words, front-loading the core action and format. No superfluous information; every word is purposeful.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter input, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is sufficiently complete. It conveys the tool's purpose and primary behavior, though a note on the returned data (e.g., file download) would enhance completeness.

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%, and the description merely restates the schema's parameter description ('json or csv default json'). It adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting baseline expectations.

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 'Exports' and the resource 'full capture history' with format options (JSON or CSV). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_history and get_history_entry by specifying it exports the entire history in bulk format.

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 for exporting full history but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_history or search_history, nor does it mention when not to use it. Usage context is implied from sibling tool names.

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