Export EA tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether the export returns a file, a URL, or data directly, or whether it is synchronous. It provides no value beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentence with no fluff, directly stating the action and resource. While it is terse, it is not verbose or poorly structured. It could benefit from additional details, but the conciseness itself is appropriate.

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 an output schema, the description should at least hint at what the export returns (e.g., file, JSON, URL) or any special behavior like long-running operations. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's input/output behavior. The description is too sparse to be considered complete.

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 explain the 'query' parameter at all. The parameter is a generic object with additionalProperties, and without any explanation, the agent cannot infer how to construct or use the query. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 the action ('Export') and the resource ('Remediation Plan tasks'), making it distinct from other task-related siblings like list or get. However, it lacks specificity about the export format or scope, so it does not fully distinguish itself from other export tools.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison with sibling tools like cymulate_ea_tasks_list or cymulate_ea_cves_export. The only implied usage is the literal action of exporting tasks, which is not enough.

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