Export Team Entries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description's one genuine addition is the environment prerequisite 'Requires TEAM_DB_PATH', which is useful operational context; it says nothing about truncation behavior from the default limit of 100 or what happens if the DB path is unset.

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 short sentences, purpose front-loaded, zero filler. The prerequisite is tacked on the end rather than integrated, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile, but with 7 undocumented parameters the description should say more about 'limit' (export completeness) and 'use_test_db', and should route the agent away from the overlapping sibling export tools. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load: it meaningfully maps format, start_date/end_date, entry_type, and tags (4 of 7 params). It leaves 'limit' (default 100, with real truncation consequences for an export) and 'use_test_db' entirely unexplained, and gives no allowed values for 'format'.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Export team entries') plus the supported output formats and filter dimensions, which is more than a restatement of the title. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling 'export_entries' (non-team variant) or 'team_export_markdown', even though the format='markdown' option visibly overlaps the latter.

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?

The phrase 'with optional date range, type, and tag filters' hints at capability but gives no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to the sibling export tools. An agent must infer the team-scoping rationale from the tool name alone.

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