open_export_dialog

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the key action (opening dialog), the side effect (copying target_path to clipboard), the non-action (does NOT press Render), the return value (remaining steps), and a system requirement (Accessibility). This is a comprehensive and honest description.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes essential caveats (confirmation, Accessibility) without fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return details are covered elsewhere. The description provides enough context for an agent to understand the multi-step export process and the need for user confirmation. However, the missing format_hint semantics and lack of detail about null target_path behavior prevent a perfect score.

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 explains target_path (copied to clipboard for pasting into save sheet), but format_hint is completely unexplained. The description adds meaning for only one of two parameters, leaving the other ambiguous.

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 opens the Export Audio/Video dialog (Cmd-Shift-R), copies target_path to the clipboard, and returns remaining steps. It explicitly notes it does NOT press Render, which distinguishes it from a potential export/rendering tool. This is a specific verb+resource with a clear non-action.

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 provides clear context: use this to open the export dialog and prepare the path for pasting, but you must manually confirm the export. It also notes the Accessibility requirement, indicating a prerequisite. No explicit alternative tools or exclusions are mentioned, but the intended use is unmistakable.

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