openbci_export

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes operations but omits side effects (e.g., file overwrites, network multicast behavior), permissions needed, or error states (e.g., invalid streamer params). The lack of detail on what 'route' entails (does it start/stop streams? is it persistent?) reduces transparency.

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?

Well-structured with a header, bulleted operations, and examples. Every sentence adds value: the header states purpose, operations list modes, examples clarify syntax. No fluff or redundancy. Efficiently communicates necessary info in minimal space.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers operations and gives examples but lacks info on return values, error behavior, prerequisites (e.g., board must be streaming), and lifecycle (e.g., does streamer_add start immediately?). Agent may need to infer details from sibling tools like openbci_board.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining each operation's role and providing BrainFlow streamer syntax examples for streamer_params. It contextualizes ip_address and ip_port for multicast, and file_path for file export, enriching the schema's basic descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Route live EEG to external consumers via BrainFlow streamers', specifying the verb (route/export) and resource (EEG stream). Lists three distinct operations (streamer_add, streamer_file, streamer_multicast), differentiating from sibling tools like openbci_board or openbci_signal which handle other aspects.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings. While operations are described, there's no mention of prerequisites, alternatives (e.g., using openbci_stream instead), or when not to use. The description assumes the agent already knows to choose export for streaming.

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