moving_export_inventory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: it explains that html carries print CSS, markdown/csv/json return inline when small, files only land in MEASURE_MCP_OUTPUT_DIR, output_name cannot contain folders and never overwrites, the result's ``path`` records the location, and the output includes a "Not counted" section plus a not-a-quote disclaimer.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and every subsequent sentence adds operational detail rather than filler. The dense backtick-laden middle is information-rich, though it could be trimmed slightly.

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 7-param export tool with an output schema, the description covers the important behavioral surface (formats, file handling, non-overwrite, output path, caveats). The remaining gap is undocumented behavior for group_by, title, and include_weights.

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 must compensate, and it explains estimate_id, the estimate dict, the four format behaviors, and the output_name constraints (plain file name, extension follows format). It leaves title, group_by, and include_weights entirely undocumented, so coverage is substantial but incomplete.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: turns an estimate into a printable/shareable inventory list. The direction (estimate -> inventory list) inherently distinguishes it from the sibling moving_estimate_from_inventory, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

Provides clear context on how to feed the tool: pass ``estimate_id`` from moving_estimate_* or the full dict from detail='full'. However it never states when NOT to use this tool or explicitly contrasts it with moving_estimate_from_inventory, so guidance stops short of explicit alternatives.

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