Export Content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context: only live pages are exported and fork copies appear in 'skipped' as {id, reason}. It does not mention pagination or limits on large exports, but the fork/skipped disclosure is valuable beyond 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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then clearly sectioned scope filters, field selection, and return shape. Each line earns its place; the structured formatting makes scanning fast.

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 no output schema, the description supplies the return shape (total count and item fields). For a zero-required-param read tool with full schema coverage, everything an agent needs to scope and call it correctly is present.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by annotating template_name as 'most useful for bulk workflows' with concrete examples ('Concept Page', 'Blog Post') and demonstrating the fields array syntax, adding meaning beyond the schema's terse descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb (export) and resource (content items), plus the output form (structured JSON array with full field data). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_content or get_content, which don't carry the batch-export/full-field intent.

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?

Gives an explicit workflow (export → transform externally → re-import via bulk_update_content), naming the downstream sibling tool. Scope filters are described with guidance on which to prefer for bulk work.

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