xcresult_export_attachment

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

With no annotations, the description partially covers behavior by noting the conversion capability to JSON. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, permissions needed, or effects on the source file. The 'export' verb suggests reading but is not explicit.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key feature. It is concise without unnecessary words.

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 is too brief given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations). It omits important context like output format (except for JSON conversion case), error conditions, and relationship to sibling tools like xcresult_list_attachments needed to obtain attachment indices.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what is already in the schema descriptions. According to guidelines, this yields baseline score of 3.

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 tool exports a specific attachment by index and can convert App UI hierarchy to JSON. It differentiates from sibling tools like xcresult_list_attachments (lists) and xcresult_get_screenshot (gets screenshot) by focusing on export of a specific indexed attachment.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., need to list attachments first) or conditions under which this tool is appropriate versus other xcresult tools.

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