Download Rapid7 Export

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false), not destructive (destructiveHint=false), idempotent (idempotentHint=true), and open-world. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it downloads Parquet files and loads them into the DuckDB database for querying. No contradictions with 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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the main action, providing a usage condition, and detailing the execution. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 explains the tool's purpose, when to use it, and what it does (downloads and loads into database). An output schema exists (not shown) so return values are covered. There is no mention of error handling or behavior for invalid export IDs, but the precondition partially addresses that. Overall, it is complete enough for a tool with rich annotations and schema.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters having descriptions. The description does not add any additional information about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It reinforces that export_id must be from a completed export, but that is already in the parameter description. 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 tool downloads a completed Rapid7 export and loads it into the database. It specifies the verb ('download' and 'load'), the resource ('completed Rapid7 export'), and the destination ('local DuckDB database'). It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing the workflow step (after check_rapid7_export_status).

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 explicitly instructs to call this tool after check_rapid7_export_status confirms the export is COMPLETE, providing a clear precondition. It does not directly list alternative tools, but the sibling list includes related tools like start_rapid7_export and check_rapid7_export_status, and the workflow context is clear.

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