document_export

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'Export current DocumentIR' but does not disclose behavior such as whether the original is modified, permissions required, size limits, or whether the output is returned directly or saved to a path. The output schema exists but is not shown.

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 sentence of 7 words, which is concise but under-specified. Every word earns its place, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 4 parameters (2 required), no annotations, and an output schema not shown, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'current DocumentIR' means, how output_path works with overwrite, or what the return value is. Incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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%, so description must compensate. It only mentions output_format by listing options, but does not explain doc_id, overwrite behavior, or output_path semantics. The description adds minimal value over the schema property titles.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Export' and the resource 'DocumentIR', listing four specific output formats (md, docx, pdf, xlsx). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like document_read_chunk or document_validate, but could be improved by clarifying what 'DocumentIR' refers to.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among 22 siblings, there is no mention of when export is preferred over other operations like document_read_chunk or mes_export_json. No context about prerequisites or restrictions.

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