Export session report (HTML)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool writes a file, includes conditional screenshots, and contains an appendix with network/log data, plus returns the file path. It omits details about overwrite behavior or prerequisites, but for a report exporter this is reasonably transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and includes necessary context about contents and recommended usage. Every sentence contributes meaning without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it produces, return value, and recommended pairing with start_recording. It lacks explicit statements about required recording state or behavior when no recording exists, but the core use case is well communicated.

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 low (33%), so the description must compensate. It mentions that the report includes network requests and logs, which indirectly explains the include_logs and include_network parameters, but does not explicitly map them. The output_path parameter is only described in the schema. The description adds moderate value over the sparse schema.

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 writes a self-contained HTML report of the recorded session, with specific contents (timeline, screenshots, appendix). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_flow or take_screenshot by describing the exact output format and scope.

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 gives explicit usage guidance by recommending 'Best with start_recording(report=true)' and mentioning the conditional 'if report capture was on'. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use it.

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