export_deck

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Local study app tool' gives no information about effects (e.g., destructive, read-only), required permissions, or side effects. The description adds no value beyond the tool name.

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 very short but not appropriately sized; it is underspecified. Every word should add value, but 'Local study app tool' is nearly devoid of useful information. It does not earn its place.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description must provide a complete picture of the tool's purpose and behavior. It fails entirely, offering only a vague label. The tool's complexity is low, yet the description is grossly insufficient.

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?

The input schema has no parameters (type object, no properties), so schema description coverage is 100%. With zero parameters, the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter information. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 'Local study app tool' is extremely vague and does not specify what the tool does. It fails to state a verb or resource, and does not distinguish the tool from its numerous siblings. The tool name 'export_deck' suggests export functionality, but the description provides no clarity, making it almost tautological.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternative siblings like 'import_deck', 'duplicate_deck', or other study app tools. There is no context on prerequisites or scenarios.

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