Export dataset (CSV, Excel, or JSON Lines)

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the output is 'CSV text' with input columns then output columns, one line per row, and that xlsx is binary and browser-oriented — a critical operational caveat for an agent that can't handle binary. It does not discuss size limits or truncation.

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 first line restates the title verbatim, which is dead weight, and the second sentence stacks parentheticals (jsonl note, xlsx note, list_dataset_rows note) that tax readability. The useful content is front-loaded, but it could be tightened to two clean sentences.

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 output schema, the description usefully describes the returned shape (CSV text, input then output columns, one row per line) and the format alternatives. Combined with annotations covering safety, an agent has enough to call it correctly; the only gap is behavior for large datasets or pagination.

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%, so both parameters are already documented with an enum. The description still adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining what `jsonl` produces and flagging that `xlsx` is binary/browser-suited, which affects how an agent should pick a format.

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 states a specific verb+resource (export dataset) and enumerates the supported formats (CSV, Excel, JSON Lines), making the operation unambiguous. It also names a sibling (list_dataset_rows) for the small-row case, though the opening line mostly repeats the title rather than framing the action.

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?

It gives an explicit alternative with a condition: 'For a few rows prefer `list_dataset_rows` (it carries cell states).' It also implicitly steers away from xlsx for agent use by noting it is binary and meant for a browser. No guidance on very large exports or rate/size limits, but the core when-to-use routing is present.

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