export

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Export & validate' but does not explain what validation entails, whether the operation is read-only or destructive, or any side effects. The behavior is largely unspecified.

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 a single line but is poorly structured with pipe separators and trailing punctuation. It is not clear or easy to parse. While short, it sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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 3 parameters and a provided output schema, the description should cover the tool's behavior comprehensively. It does not explain return values, valid parameter combinations, or the meaning of 'validate'. The tool's functionality remains ambiguous.

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 description lists possible values for the 'target' parameter (e.g., status, check, claims), which adds meaning beyond the schema (which has no descriptions and 0% coverage). However, it does not explain 'scope' or 'jurisdiction', and the list is messy with a trailing 'latex.' and a pipe.

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 is vague: 'Export & validate' followed by a pipe-separated list. It does not clearly specify what is being exported or validated, and the list is poorly formatted. The tool name 'export' is generic, and the description fails to distinguish it from sibling tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'claim', 'figure', etc. The description does not explain the context or prerequisites for using the tool.

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