export_style

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not say whether exporting modifies the document, where the exported style goes, what format is produced, or what the return value represents. It only restates the action and parameter sources.

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 very concise: one clear purpose sentence followed by a brief arg list. There is no fluff or redundancy. It could be slightly more informative while remaining short, but it is not padded.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description is minimally serviceable, but it omits important context: whether the document is modified, what the export output is, and how this relates to import_style/manage_style. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to document return values, but the missing behavior and routing context still leave it incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds some value by noting doc_id is a 'Document ID from open_document,' but the style parameter is just 'Style name to export,' which adds no meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

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: 'Export a style from the document.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling import_style, though it does not explicitly mention any sibling. The arg list reinforces the resource by naming doc_id and style.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as import_style or manage_style. The only implied prerequisite is that doc_id comes from open_document, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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