sketchwright_export_diagram

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It mentions formats but does not disclose that this likely writes to disk, how output_path and overwrite behave, what happens if the file exists, or whether either scene or specification must be supplied.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, and the verb and output formats come early. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to gaps elsewhere.

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 five-parameter export tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is too thin. It omits input selection rules, overwrite semantics, output_path behavior, and the exact allowed format values.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It loosely maps 'specification'/'scene' and the two formats, but says nothing about the overwrite flag, output_path, defaults, or the relationship between the five 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 uses a specific verb ('Export') and resource ('diagram specification or Excalidraw scene') and names the output formats (.excalidraw JSON or .svg). It distinguishes exporting from create/update siblings by implication, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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?

It states what can be exported but gives no guidance on when to choose export over siblings like sketchwright_validate_diagram or sketchwright_create_diagram. It also does not clarify whether scene or specification is required or how they relate.

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