agent_export_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose real traits: only counts are returned, the API key is excluded, the call authenticates as the local credential-store identity, and the returned content is untrusted third-party data that must not be acted upon. This is meaningful disclosure beyond a bare purpose statement, though it does not cover rate limits, cost, or whether the export persists server-side.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the most decision-relevant constraints (counts only, no API key, untrusted data). Tight, though the sentence 'Acts as the identity in the local credential store' is slightly elliptical and could be clearer.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value shape need not be explained, and the description supplies the safety, privacy, and auth context an agent needs before invoking. Remaining gap is the absence of any indication of when this export should be chosen over sibling agent tools.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly adds nothing about parameter syntax because there is none.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: build an export of agent data and report its contents. It distinguishes itself from sibling read tools by being an export operation rather than a status/lookup call, though it does not name an alternative export or explain how the 'export' differs from e.g. agent_analytics or agent_get_identity.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative is named among the many sibling agent_* tools. The mention that it 'acts as the identity in the local credential store' hints at an auth prerequisite but is not framed as usage guidance.

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