memoria_exportar

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden. It only states that the tool reads the content during export, but fails to disclose whether the export is destructive, what permissions are required, or the nature of the output. The existence of an output schema may partially compensate, but the description itself is insufficient.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It front-loads the verb, but the parenthetical is unclear. Every word is used, but the overall clarity could be improved.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, return value explanation is not needed. However, the description fails to provide sufficient context about the export process, such as whether it creates a file, triggers a download, or modifies state. For a tool with two parameters and no annotations, more completeness is expected.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any information about the parameters beyond what is already in the schema (e.g., 'nombre' is project name, 'tipo_archivo' with default 'resumen'). No enhancement from the description.

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 verb 'exportar' and the resource 'archivo de memoria', indicating an export action. However, it doesn't fully distinguish from sibling tools like 'memoria_archivar' or 'memoria_resumen', since 'exportar' could overlap with archiving or summary generation. The parenthetical 'lee el contenido' adds redundancy.

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 vs alternatives such as 'memoria_leer' for reading or 'memoria_archivar' for archiving. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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