export_properties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the agent knows the operation is safe and idempotent. The description adds that the output is JSON and the query matching, but no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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, clear sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and output, making it immediately useful for the agent.

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?

For a simple export tool with two optional parameters and annotations covering safety, the description covers the essential purpose and use case. It could elaborate on output structure or encoding requirements, but overall it is adequate.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description references 'matching a query' which ties to the query parameter, but adds no extra meaning beyond schema descriptions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool exports system properties matching a query to a JSON object, with a specific use case for environment snapshots. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_system_properties or bulk_get_properties by specifying the action (export) and output format (JSON).

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 mentions 'useful for environment snapshots,' implying a use case, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not compare with alternatives like list_system_properties or get_system_property, leaving the agent to infer context.

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