classic_mac_get_menu_items

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation (get items) and specifies the returned data includes enabled/disabled state and keyboard shortcuts. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but as a read tool, this is reasonably transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and a key requirement. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains what the tool retrieves (menu items with state and shortcuts). It could optionally describe the return format, but the current level is sufficient for an AI agent.

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%, with the description adding no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the two parameters. The baseline score of 3 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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'items in a specific menu', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like classic_mac_list_menus (lists menus) and classic_mac_menu_select (selects an item). It uniquely identifies what the tool retrieves.

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 states 'Requires AgentBridge' as a prerequisite but does not provide explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives like classic_mac_list_menus or classic_mac_menu_select. Usage is implied but lacks exclusions or direct guidance.

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