export

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which the description aligns with by implying a non-destructive export operation. However, the description adds little behavioral context beyond this—no mention of rate limits, performance implications, or what 'export' entails (e.g., file generation, data transfer). It doesn't contradict annotations but offers minimal additional insight.

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, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and format, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested exportTarget options) and lack of output schema, the description is minimal. It doesn't explain what the export produces (e.g., a file, data stream) or how results are returned. While annotations cover safety, more context on the export process would be helpful for an agent.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no specific parameter semantics beyond implying that 'exportTarget' handles queries or aggregations. It doesn't clarify parameter interactions or usage nuances, relying entirely on the schema.

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 action ('Export') and what it exports ('a query or aggregation results'), specifying the output format ('EJSON format'). It distinguishes from simple query tools by emphasizing export functionality, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings like 'find' or 'aggregate' that might return data without export.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find' or 'aggregate', nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It lacks context about typical use cases, such as when full result export is needed versus limited queries.

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