export_session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Export') but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, whether it modifies the session, or details about the output (e.g., file generation, format specifics). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely creates files or data.

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 directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity of an export operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the exported report contains, how it's delivered (e.g., file download, data return), or behavioral aspects like side effects. This is inadequate for a tool that likely produces significant output.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting both parameters with enums and defaults. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond implying 'session_id' refers to the current session, but this is minimal value. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 resource ('current debug session as a report'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_coverage_report' or 'get_profile_stats', which might also produce reports, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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, such as other report-generating siblings. It doesn't mention prerequisites like needing an active session or specify contexts where exporting is appropriate, leaving usage unclear.

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