New file from your own file

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, destructive operation, so the safety bar is partly covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it copies rather than moves, verifies the copy opens, and refuses to overwrite an existing path. It does not explain why destructiveHint is true given the no-overwrite guarantee, but there is no contradiction.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action and the no-overwrite guarantee front-loaded before the routing guidance. Every clause carries 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 two-parameter copy tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies everything an agent needs: the action, the source-file constraint, the overwrite refusal, and the sibling it replaces.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the 'must not exist yet' constraint on path. The description restates the template/path roles without adding format or syntax detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource (start a new document by copying one of the user's own .numbers/.key/.pages files) and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling iwork_create, which handles Apple's built-in templates.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('when the user has their own template or past file to start from') and an explicit alternative ('For Apple's built-in templates use iwork_create'). Nothing is left to inference.

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