Export Chapter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'various formats' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, or what happens during export (e.g., file creation, download). The description is minimal and lacks critical context for a mutation-like tool.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action. However, it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely performs an export operation. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral aspects like side effects. For a tool with 2 parameters and potential complexity, this is inadequate.

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 parameter documentation (id as Chapter ID, format as Export format with enum). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining format implications or id constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a chapter in various formats' clearly states the action (export) and resource (chapter), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from siblings like export_book or export_page. It doesn't specify what 'export' entails (e.g., file generation, download link).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_book or export_page. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing chapter access) or exclusions (e.g., not for attachments). Usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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