export_all_study_chapters

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Export' implies a read operation that generates output, it doesn't specify whether this is a long-running process, what permissions are required, whether it creates files or returns data directly, or any rate limits. The description lacks crucial behavioral context for a tool that presumably processes multiple chapters.

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, efficient sentence that states exactly what the tool does with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter and clear purpose.

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 an export tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what format the PGN output takes (file download, direct return, streaming), whether all chapters are exported at once or sequentially, error conditions, or what happens with large studies. The lack of behavioral context makes this incomplete for practical use.

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 the single 'studyId' parameter. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about the parameter beyond what's in the schema (e.g., what constitutes a valid study ID, where to find study IDs, or format requirements). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the documentation work.

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 ('Export') and target resource ('all chapters of a study in PGN format'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'export_study_chapter' or 'export_game', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'export_study_chapter' (for single chapters) or 'export_game' (for games rather than studies). There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or appropriate contexts for this operation.

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