Export Joint Trajectories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds context about the output being 'unified, interleaved' but does not disclose output format, pagination, or other runtime behavior. This is a modest addition beyond 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It packs the essential verb, resource, and purpose into one concise statement.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what the export returns (format, structure, or delivery mechanism). It only says 'Export...trajectories' without stating whether this is a file download, a list, or a stream. The absence of this information makes the description incomplete 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% with each parameter (limit, project, session_id) individually described. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics or usage details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Export' and specifies the resource: 'unified, interleaved event and visual observation trajectories correlated by session ID'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_graph or export_issues, and even from the more generic export_trajectories by emphasizing the joint event+visual nature.

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 'for agent training', which gives a clear intended use context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or how it compares to close sibling export_trajectories. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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