System Set Show All Extensions

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond the annotations. It does not explain what the setting affects, whether it requires permissions, whether it applies globally, or what happens when 'enabled' is toggled. It simply restates the tool name.

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 short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It contains no useful information beyond the title/name, so brevity is achieved by omitting substance rather than by prioritizing relevant details.

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 is simple, with one boolean parameter, and the name suggests a Finder preference about showing file extensions. However, the description does not confirm the domain, the current setting behavior, or the semantics of 'enabled', leaving meaningful gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it.

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 provides no explanation for the 'enabled' boolean parameter. The agent is left to guess the meaning of true/false and the exact effect on system settings.

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 is a tautology: it merely restates the tool name as 'system_set_show_all_extensions' and labels it a 'Delegated Apple domain tool' without saying what the tool actually does. No verb, resource, or effect is described beyond the name itself.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling list contains many other system_set_* tools, but the description does not clarify which Finder or system setting this one controls or how it differs from tools like system_set_show_hidden_files.

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