aap_export_all_resources

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

Annotations already establish readOnly=true and destructive=false. The description adds the concrete behavioral detail that output is 'a single YAML document compatible with the infra.aap_configuration Ansible collection' and that it returns a 'Combined YAML/JSON export' as a string, which is useful beyond annotations.

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 well-structured with a summary line, example, output note, and Args section. Every part provides useful information without unnecessary fluff, and it remains within a reasonable length.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return type, which is sufficient for this read-only export tool given annotations. It does not mention potential size limits or authentication requirements, but these are not essential given the tool's simple contract.

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?

The description explicitly documents both parameters in an Args section, adding meaning to the bare schema: organization_id 'scopes exports to one org' and format is restricted to 'yaml' or 'json'. The schema only provides a terse note on organization_id and no description for format, so this is significant added value.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Export' and the exact resource scope: 'all AAP resources (projects, inventories, job templates, workflows)'. It also distinguishes from sibling export tools by emphasizing 'all' resources, and includes an example.

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 a clear use case via the example 'Export all job templates as code' and clarifies the bulk export scope. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over the individual export siblings (e.g., aap_export_project), so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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