export_project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the key behavior of not running the export and returning a string. However, it does not mention error conditions, how preset selection works, or any dependencies on other tools, leaving gaps in the behavioral profile.

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, focused sentence with a parenthetical clarification. It wastes no words and front-loads the most important non-execution behavior, making it easy to parse.

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 covers the basic purpose and return type, which is helpful given no output schema. However, it does not explain how to identify a preset (preset_name vs preset_index), the meaning of debug, or the need to first list presets. It is minimally viable but not fully complete for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only refers to 'preset' generically and does not explain the roles of preset_name, preset_index, or debug, nor how they interact. This leaves the agent without sufficient guidance for choosing parameter values.

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's action: 'Build the headless CLI command to export a preset.' It also explicitly distinguishes this from actually performing the export by saying 'returns the command string, does not run the export,' which separates it from sibling execution/deployment 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?

The description implies when to use this tool: when you need the CLI command string rather than executing the export. It provides a clear behavioral context but does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, though the non-execution distinction is strong.

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