export_pnml

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It states it exports the current net and returns a string, implying no side effects. However, it does not explicitly confirm read-only nature or discuss performance/limits. The compatibility note adds value.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds value: purpose, output type, and compatibility.

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 export tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description covers input (current net), output (string), and compatibility. It does not explain 'current Petri Net' context, but that is likely assumed. Sufficiently complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the description adds no parameter-level details. Per guidelines, 0 params gets baseline 4, and the description is clear about output format, which is sufficient.

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 'Export the current Petri Net to PNML XML format' with a specific verb ('Export') and resource ('PNML XML'). It distinguishes from siblings (many add_* and connect_* tools) by being the only export operation.

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 mentions compatibility with TINA, PetriObjModel, and CPN Tools, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or any prerequisites. No exclusions or usage contexts are provided.

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