ifcx_export_ifc_step

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Export' (implying file output), but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation/overwrite), required state (e.g., draft must be active), or outcomes. The mention of 'IFClite create' is cryptic and adds no transparency.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it omits essential details needed for correct invocation. It front-loads the verb but sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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 the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool reliably. It does not cover input expectations, output behavior, or prerequisite conditions. Sibling tools exist for similar exports, but no distinguishing context is provided.

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 adds no information about the two parameters (sessionId, outputPath). An agent cannot infer what sessionId refers to (draft identifier?) or what outputPath expects (file path? directory?). This is a critical gap.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'export', resource 'draft subset', and format 'IFC4 STEP' using 'IFClite create'. This differentiates it from sibling export tools like ifcx_export_alpha or ifcx_export_tiered. However, 'draft subset' is vague and not precisely defined.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ifcx_export_tiered, ifcx_export_alpha, or ifcx_import_ifc_step. The description does not mention prerequisites, constraints, or conditions for use.

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