eap_export_pdf

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

Discloses that the tool is included with membership and uses no credits, which is valuable behavioral context. Also explains the annotated-pdf output format (24h download URL). However, it does not describe return types for json, html, or text outputs, nor mention any side effects or rate limits. With no annotations, the description reasonably covers the key aspects.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The key action and formats are front-loaded. Every sentence adds value—the first gives purpose and membership info, the second details formats. Highly efficient.

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 tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and parameter details well. It lacks explicit description of return values for json, html, and text formats, but the schema's explainability and the tool's simplicity (likely returns the converted file directly) make it mostly complete. The missing return details are a minor gap.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond the input schema by explaining each format: 'json (structured document tree)', 'annotated-pdf (layout visualization with labeled structure boxes — returned as a 24h download URL)'. The schema only gives enum names and basic descriptions, so the description enriches parameter understanding.

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?

Clearly states 'Export a PDF to another format' and lists the specific formats (json, html, text, annotated-pdf). The verb 'Export' and resource 'PDF' are explicit, and the tool name and description distinguish it from siblings like eap_check_pdf, eap_convert_to_markdown, etc.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Pass a publicly accessible URL of the PDF' and notes membership inclusion. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives, but the specificity of formats and the mention of membership provide sufficient guidance for typical use.

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