export_public_dashcard_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, what the return format is (file download?), or any side effects. The description is too sparse to inform the agent about behavioral traits.

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 very concise (one sentence) but at the expense of completeness. It front-loads the purpose but fails to earn its place by omitting critical details. A middle ground between conciseness and informativeness is missing.

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 has 4 parameters nested in an object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain how to obtain required identifiers (e.g., uuid) or what the export format options imply. The agent is left guessing about prerequisites and results.

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 adds no meaning beyond the input schema. The schema has 0% description coverage (except export_format's brief 'Export format'), and the description does not explain what uuid, dashcard_id, or card_id represent. The agent gets no semantic help beyond the 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 'Export results of a public dashcard query in Metabase' clearly identifies the action (Export) and the resource (results of a public dashcard query). It distinguishes from siblings like export_card_query by specifying 'public' and 'dashcard', though it could be more explicit about what makes a dashcard 'public'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_public_card_query or export_dashcard_query. No prerequisites or context about public vs. private dashcards are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision-support.

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