dpanel_explorer_exportExports and packages specified files from a mount point into an archive. Use when you need to download or backup multiple files from a DPanel environment.
导出文件（打包）。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| file_list | Yes | ||
| mount_point | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.11.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says '导出文件（打包）' and gives no information about permissions required, whether the operation is synchronous or asynchronous, what happens to the files, or any side effects. This is a serious gap for a tool with no structured hints.
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 extremely short (one sentence fragment) with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. For a tool with two required parameters and no annotations, a single terse phrase does not earn its place by conveying necessary information.
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?
Although an output schema exists (so return values need not be explained), the description is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity. With no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and two required parameters, it fails to explain what mount_point means, what file_list contains, or what packaging entails. An agent cannot call this tool correctly based on the description.
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 does not mention either parameter ('mount_point' or 'file_list'). It adds no meaning beyond the bare parameter names in the schema. With two required parameters and no schema descriptions, the description should compensate but does not.
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 states a verb ('导出' / export) and resource ('文件' / files) with the added note that it packages them ('打包'). However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like dpanel_explorer_import or dpanel_explorer_unzip, and it omits what exactly is being exported or from where. It is more than a tautology but remains vague.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or any of the many sibling explorer tools (e.g., import, unzip). The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.