export_sequence_fbx

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the export action and gives no information about side effects, file overwrite behavior, path expectations, or failure modes. This is a significant gap for an export operation.

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 no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Although the tool is simple and the schema covers both parameters, the description lacks behavioral transparency and usage context. It is adequate for a straightforward export but leaves open questions about overwrites, prerequisites, and return behavior.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides clear definitions for output_path and sequence_path.

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 specifies the exact operation ('Export'), the resource ('a level sequence'), and the target format ('FBX'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like export_asset (generic asset export) and render_sequence (rendering rather than file export).

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use this tool over alternatives, or mention any prerequisites or exclusions. An agent gets no context on selecting this tool vs export_asset or render_sequence.

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