Export Scientific Figure Library diagnostics

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

Annotations provide no positive safety hints (all false), so the description carries the burden. It adds meaningful behavioral context: 'never uploads data', 'excludes user text and absolute paths', and 'Defaults to sanitized_bundle'. It does not contradict annotations, though it could further clarify that includeUserText/includeAbsolutePaths can override the exclusions.

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 dense sentence with no filler. Every clause adds value: bounded, secret-safe, diagnostic ZIP, current session, sanitized_bundle default, exclusions, and no uploads. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's purpose.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no helpful annotations, the description is too brief to be fully actionable. It does not explain how to use time_range/correlation_id scopes, what 'bounded' means, what full_local includes, or how the ZIP is returned. The safety guarantees are useful but the operational details are missing.

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 for 7 parameters. It only addresses detail (via 'sanitized_bundle'), includeUserText/includeAbsolutePaths (via 'excludes user text and absolute paths'), and scope (via 'current server session'). It leaves scope enum values, since/until, and correlationId unexplained.

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 ('diagnostic ZIP') with clear scope ('for the current server session'). It distinguishes itself from sibling bundle-export tools by emphasizing 'diagnostics' and 'secret-safe', making its purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly indicates when this tool is appropriate: exporting a bounded, secret-safe diagnostic ZIP for the current session. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can infer this is the diagnostic-export tool rather than the bundle-export or planning tools.

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