Export Results

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description says the tool writes files to an output folder, which is a side-effecting behavior and contradicts the read-only claim. The description also does not disclose overwrite behavior, file naming conventions, or whether the export preserves prior files.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the core action, resource, and destination in twelve words and earns its place without redundancy.

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?

The schema covers all parameter semantics and an output schema is present, so return-value documentation is not required. However, the description lacks explicit usage guidance and contains a behavioral contradiction with the readOnlyHint annotation, leaving the definition only partially complete for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it.

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 schema already documents all parameters meaningfully. The description adds little beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 applies because no compensation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Export') with a clear resource ('a saved query's records') and destination ('files under the output folder'). This clearly distinguishes it from result-returning siblings like get_results, since the focus is on producing files rather than returning data in-memory.

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 'saved query's records' implies the prerequisite of having a saved query, and the schema parameter description reinforces that url_or_hash comes from list_queries. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_results, nor does it give any when-not-to-use guidance. Usage context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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