start_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does disclose an important trait: export creation is allowed in read_only mode and does not alter fieldwork data. However, it does not mention async behavior, job lifecycle, or other side effects of starting an export.

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 focused sentences with no filler. The first states the core action and identity format; the second adds a meaningful permission caveat. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Without an output schema or annotations, the description does not explain return values, how to poll for completion, or how this fits with sibling tools like list_export_jobs, get_export_job, and download_export_file. Multiple optional parameters remain unexplained.

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%, and the description only clarifies questionnaire_identity (GUID$Version). The other seven parameters, including from_utc, to_utc, profile, include_meta, interview_status, and paradata_reduced, receive no additional semantic explanation.

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 a specific verb ('Start') and resource ('Survey Solutions export job'), and gives an example identity format (GUID$Version). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_export_jobs, download_export_file, and cancel_export_job.

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 export_all_formats or export_and_combine_questionnaire_versions. The read_only note is permission context, not usage direction.

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