Apple Open File Path

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the operation goes through the Apple Files app and returns iCloud-aware metadata, implying a visible open action with a specialized result. It does not contradict the annotations, though it could mention whether it launches a GUI or requires specific permissions.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource and adds scope plus output context without filler. Every word contributes to understanding when and how to use the tool.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers the core action and the iCloud-specific purpose. It lacks explicit usage boundaries against sibling file tools, but the essential calling context is present.

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 carries the burden for explaining the 'path' parameter. It does usefully clarify that the path can refer to either a file or a folder, but it does not specify path format, whether it should be absolute or iCloud-relative, or any constraints, so some semantics are left to inference.

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 ('Open'), names the exact resource ('a file or folder through Apple Files'), and specifies the distinguishing output ('iCloud-aware path metadata'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools such as files_open_path or apple_reveal_in_finder.

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 phrase 'through Apple Files' implies when this tool is appropriate: opening in the Files app and needing iCloud-aware metadata. However, the description does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, leaving sibling differentiation mostly to inference.

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