bag_health_mcp__list_export_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context: 'Returns file names, not the data' and mentions version parameter behavior, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 structured with XML tags (use_case, important_notes, example) and is front-loaded with the core statement. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. The example aids understanding.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return format. It covers the main purpose, parameter version context, and links to the sibling tool. For a simple list tool, this is sufficiently 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% (though the schema itself describes the version parameter). The description does not elaborate on the version parameter but successfully explains the return value and usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema's own description covers the parameter.

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 tool lists export file names from BAG IDD, provides examples of file names (e.g., INFLUENZA_oblig), and differentiates from the sibling tool download_export by noting it returns names not data.

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 includes a use_case tag explaining when to use (discover bulk datasets) and an important_notes tag directing to use with bag_health_mcp__download_export. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the guidance is clear for the intended use.

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