Resolve Apple Target

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a read-only operation, and the description's 'resolve' verb aligns. The description adds the context of operating against 'current inventory and preferences', but lacks details on specific behavioral traits like scope constraints or result format beyond what annotations provide.

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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. However, it may be too concise, missing important details that could fit in a few more words.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain what 'friendly target name' means, the role of scope, or the output. Given the complexity of 4 parameters and a meaningful output, the description is incomplete and leaves many questions unanswered.

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%, meaning no parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not mention any of the four parameters (query, scope, use_default, require_writable), failing to add meaning beyond the raw schema. This is a critical gap for a 4-parameter tool.

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 action (resolve) and the resource (friendly target name) against inventory and preferences. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools as there is no other resolve tool, but the term 'friendly target name' is somewhat vague without further context.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or when not to use it. Among sibling tools, there are inventory and preferences tools, but no usage distinctions are provided.

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