GetExports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds one useful prerequisite ('for a loaded module'), but says nothing about the pagination implied by limit/offset defaults, nor about truncation or error behavior for unloaded modules.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is clean, though arguably undersized for a tool with three undocumented parameters.

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 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and paginated parameters, the description should carry the burden of explaining module selection and result paging. It does not, and the read-only annotations only partially compensate.

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% for all three parameters, so the schema provides only names and defaults. The description hints that 'module' selects a loaded module's exports, but limit and offset — which imply paged/truncated results — are left completely unexplained in both schema and description.

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?

'Return the export table for a loaded module' names a specific verb (return) and resource (export table), which is distinguishable from sibling GetImports by direction. It does not explicitly route against neighbors like DumpModule or GetModuleList, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 statement of when to call this versus GetImports, DumpModule, or GetModuleList, and no prerequisites beyond the implicit 'loaded module'. The agent must infer the workflow (load/list modules first) on its own.

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