export_all_screens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool fetches each screen's HTML code and screenshot and returns structured data, which is useful, but it does not mention potential performance/cost implications of exporting all screens, output size, or that maxScreens=0 exports everything. This is adequate but not rich.

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 contain no filler. The core action is stated first, followed by the output behavior and concrete use cases. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a tool with full parameter documentation, the description supplies the key missing context: it returns both HTML and screenshots as structured data and is intended for backup/migration. There is no output schema, but the description gives enough shape to set expectations. It could mention the 'all screens' scalability caveat, but that is 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents projectId, maxScreens, includeHtml, and includeScreenshots clearly. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the general idea of exporting all screens, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: 'Exports all screens from a Stitch project.' It clearly distinguishes this bulk-export tool from sibling tools like list_screens, get_screen, get_screen_code, or get_screen_image by covering all screens with HTML and screenshots.

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?

It gives clear usage context: 'Useful for backing up or migrating designs.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the use cases are strong enough to guide an agent to select this tool for full-project export.

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