export

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that output is credential-redacted but not anonymized, which is important context, but it leaves other behavioral aspects like side effects, permissions, or storage implications undisclosed.

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?

A single sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the main verb, and contains no filler. Every phrase adds relevant information.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with an output schema, the purpose is mostly clear. However, the lack of sibling differentiation and any side-effect disclosure leaves gaps that an agent might need to resolve before confident invocation.

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%, and the description does not explain 'run_id' or its expected format. The meaning is inferable from 'run artifacts', but the description adds no parameter-level guidance beyond the schema property name.

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 has a specific verb ('Create'), a precise resource ('ZIP of run artifacts'), and critical qualifiers ('credential-redacted, non-anonymized'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'artifacts' or 'result'.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to choose it over sibling tools such as 'artifacts', 'result', or 'logs'. There are no alternative recommendations or exclusion criteria.

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