export_network

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

注解已声明非只读、幂等、非破坏和封闭世界；描述额外说明会生成可复算文件与校验清单并返回 MCP resource URI，补充了产物形态和返回方式。未说明覆盖已有文件的策略或权限要求，但幂等注解已部分覆盖重复调用语义。

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?

单句且信息前置，没有冗余内容。但对一个需要选择导出格式的工具而言略显压缩，未展开必要参数说明。

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?

有输出 schema 和注解，描述覆盖了产物与返回 URI；但参数语义完全缺失，format 选项和 subnetwork_id 作用未说明，对正确选择格式调用仍不够完整。

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?

描述完全未提及 subnetwork_id 或 format 参数；在 schema 描述覆盖率为 0% 的情况下，没有补偿 subnetwork_id 的含义，也没有说明 tsv/json/graphml 三种格式如何选择。

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?

明确使用动词“创建”并说明产出为可复算网络文件及校验清单，还指出返回 MCP resource URI，资源与结果清晰。但没有显式与 extract_subnetwork、download_official_file 等兄弟工具区分，导出与提取的边界需要靠名称推断。

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?

描述只说明工具做什么，没有说明何时应使用本工具而不是 extract_subnetwork 或 download_official_file，也没有前置条件、排除场景或替代方案提示。

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