linkminer_create_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that it creates a task, without covering side effects, authenticity requirements, asynchronous execution, or response handling. This is a significant gap for a mutable operation.

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 with zero wasted words, making it very concise. It is efficient but arguably too terse, lacking detail that would help an agent understand invocation, though for what it contains, it is well-structured.

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?

The tool has no output schema, no required parameters, and a generic passthrough schema. The one-sentence description is insufficient to understand the expected request body or response format, especially given the complexity of the export task ecosystem indicated by sibling tools.

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?

The description does not mention parameters, but the input schema provides descriptions for both generic passthrough fields (body and query), giving 100% schema coverage. Per baseline, this is sufficient; however, the schema descriptions are generic and tool-agnostic, so the description adds no extra meaning.

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 states a specific action ('Create') and resource ('LinkMiner export task'), making the purpose clear and distinct from sibling tools like linkminer_exports or linkminer_export_suggestions. However, it is terse and does not elaborate on what an export task involves, though it is still unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where a different tool would be more appropriate, leaving the agent without directional context.

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