fgis_export_dataset

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond the annotations: it states that SQLite always existschers, that files and hashes are returned, and that exports can be JSONL and/or Parquet. It does not disclose details like file locations or whether the operation is synchronous, but it meaningfully supplements the sparse annotations.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds behavioral details (SQLite presence, returned files and hashes) with zero waste.

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 is reasonably complete for a 2-parameter tool, mentioning output types and returned artifacts. Yet it does not clarify the meaning of 'stopped', the output structure, or what happens when formats is absent, so some essential context for a new agent is missing.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the parameter documentation burden. It enumerates the possible format values ('jsonl' and 'parquet') and implies multiple selections via 'and/or', but it leaves dataset_id implicit and does not explain the default behavior when formats is null.

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 ('stopped dataset') and targets ('jsonl and/or parquet'), making the tool's core purpose evident. It is unique among the sibling tools, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from reading or querying operations.

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 'stopped dataset' implies a prerequisite for use, giving some contextual guidance. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like fgis_query_dataset or fgis_read_dataset_document, nor does it mention exclusions.

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