export_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It states the core write behavior and adds the format-inference rule, but does not mention potential overwrites, permissions, document-state requirements, or the return value.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The core operation comes first, and the second sentence adds only necessary format/default details.

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?

The description provides the essential calling details and format default behavior, which is enough for a basic call. But with no annotations and no output schema, the missing usage differentiation and side-effect/return disclosure make it incomplete for confident tool selection.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does for path ('absolute path') and format (examples plus inference from extension), while doc_id is left implicit but its name is self-evident.

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 names a specific action and resource: 'Export a document to an absolute path in the given format.' It also enumerates concrete formats and explains extension inference, making the tool's scope clear and distinguishable from siblings like save_document or open_document.

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?

Usage context is implied: this is the tool for producing a document file in a specified format at an external absolute path. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternatives are named.

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