Export entries to CSV

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the write behavior ('Returns the file path written'), the output content, and the format. It does not mention overwrite or clamping behavior, but the input schema already documents the free-tier/pro clamping for date ranges.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence adds essential information: what it exports, for whom, the row structure, and the return value. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly explains the return value ('file path written') and the file content. It covers the essentials for an agent to select and invoke the tool. Minor omissions like file overwrite behavior or encoding are acceptable given the schema richness and simple nature of the export operation.

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% with clear descriptions for all four parameters (to, from, path, project). The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema fully covers the parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('export'), resource ('the timesheet'), output format ('CSV file, excel-friendly'), and purpose ('hand to a bookkeeper'). It also specifies the row structure ('one row per entry with hours, billable, rate, currency and amount'), which clearly distinguishes it from other export-related siblings like clause_export or event_export.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool ('Call this tool to export the timesheet to a CSV file...') and for whom ('hand to a bookkeeper'). It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but among the siblings there is no direct alternative for timesheet CSV export, so the guidance is clear.

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