export_logs

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'creates a log request and evaluates feasibility' but does not clarify whether the export is synchronous, what the response contains (e.g., a job ID), or any side effects. More detail needed for a mutation-like operation.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage. No redundant information.

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?

Covers core parameters and usage, but missing details on output format, async behavior, and error handling. With no output schema, description should provide more context on what the tool returns.

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 100%, but description adds value by explaining default fields for visits and the meaning of source values. It compensates for schema being in Russian, improving usability.

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 it exports raw visit or hit logs via Logs API, creating a log request. Distinguishes between source='visits' and source='hits' for session vs pageview data, which is specific and distinguishes from sibling reporting tools.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use source='visits' versus 'hits'. However, does not mention when not to use this tool or alternatives like get_report for aggregated data, but the sibling list implies those exist.

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