export_layer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key behavior: CSV exports automatically include a WKT geometry column because GDAL drops geometry by default, and explains format inference. This adds useful context beyond basic operation.

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 with no filler. The first sentence states the core function; the second adds crucial behavioral details about format inference and CSV geometry handling. Every sentence earns its place.

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 description covers supported formats and a special case (CSV WKT), but it does not specify whether the export saves to disk or returns data, nor where the output goes. An output schema exists but is not visible; the absence of this context makes it only partially complete for a 3-parameter tool.

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 compensate. It adds meaning for 'format' (possible values and inference from path) and explains the WKT column for CSV, but does not clarify 'layer_name' or provide details about 'path' (e.g., local vs cloud storage). Partial compensation.

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 a layer to GeoJSON, Shapefile, GPKG, or CSV,' specifying both the action and the supported formats. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., filter, reproject) by focusing on 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 explains how 'format' is inferred from the path extension if omitted, providing context on parameter usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives 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.