research_export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context: scoping to own session, provenance footer, and a security note about treating source URLs as data. This is beyond what annotations provide, though the core behavioral traits are covered by annotations.

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 concise and well-structured. It front-loads the core purpose, follows with usage guidelines, and ends with important scoping/security notes. Every sentence contributes, with no redundant 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?

Given the output schema exists (so return values need not be explained), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter nuances, scoping, and security. It also mentions sibling tools for pairing, making it complete for a 3-parameter tool with rich annotations.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the difference between markdown ('readable write-up') and json ('full structured session'), and clarifies verify_links behavior ('check each source URL is still live...'). This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Export a completed sequential_search session as a shareable report.' It specifies the verb (export), resource (sequential_search session), and output formats (markdown or json), distinguishing it from sibling tools like format_bibliography and get_research_session.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to hand off or archive a research trail; pair with format_bibliography to generate a citations list, and get_research_session to inspect a session before exporting.' It also notes scope (your own session) and provenance, offering clear context for when to use this tool.

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