webform_export_submissionsExport Drupal webform submissions to CSV or JSON, applying optional filters to download the exact response data you need for reporting or analysis.
Export webform submissions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | csv | |
| filters | No | ||
| webform_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only implies a read/export operation. It does not disclose permissions, format behavior, filter semantics, output handling, or whether the export is destructive or side-effect free.
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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of wordiness, which is structurally sound. But it is too thin for a tool with three parameters and no annotations, so it fails to earn its place as a complete definition.
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?
Although an output schema exists and need not be explained, the description omits essential context for invocation: required webform_id, optional format defaulting to csv, and filters. With no annotations and no parameter descriptions, the definition is critically incomplete.
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% for 3 parameters, and the description adds no detail about webform_id, format, or filters. It does not compensate for the entirely undocumented schema, leaving required and optional parameter meaning unclear.
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 clear verb (Export) and resource (webform submissions), so an agent can identify the action. However, it provides no scope, format, or sibling differentiation, and essentially restates the title.
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 when-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternatives such as webform_submission_list are mentioned. The description gives no indication of when an agent should choose this tool over listing or retrieving submissions another way.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.