Export Layer

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

The description adds context beyond the idempotentHint annotation by specifying that target_crs reprojects on export and filter_expression applies only to vector layers. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral details, though could mention overwrite behavior or error handling.

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 very concise: two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and then detailing key parameters. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: export action, format derivation, reprojection, and filtering. It lacks mention of potential overwrite or that layer_id must be a valid project layer, but overall is adequately complete for its complexity level.

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 explains the purpose of target_crs (reprojection) and filter_expression (vector-only subset), and that output_path extension determines format. Layer_id is implied. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 that the tool exports vector or raster layers to disk, with format derived from the output_path extension. It mentions target_crs for reprojection and filter_expression for vector-only subset, precisely differentiating it from sibling tools like export_layout or export_atlas.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to export a layer to a file) but does not explicitly tell when not to use it or mention alternatives. Sibling tools include export_layout and export_atlas, but the description does not distinguish them directly.

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