export_images

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Export pages as images' without mentioning side effects (e.g., file creation, overwriting behavior), permission requirements, or return values. For a tool that likely writes files, this is a critical omission.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded but at the expense of completeness. Every sentence should earn its place, and this one does state the core purpose, but more context is needed.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain the return value, prerequisites (e.g., an open document), or how the output path is used. Given the complexity, the description is insufficient to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides. According to the rubric, when coverage is high, baseline is 3, so this score is appropriate.

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 'Export pages as images', which specifies the verb (export) and resource (pages as images). This distinguishes it from sibling export tools like export_epub and export_pdf. However, it does not mention the image format or any other specifics, so it's clear but slightly generic.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like export_epub or export_pdf. It does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or contexts where this tool is appropriate or not. The absence of usage direction leaves the agent to guess.

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