reveal_in_finder

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

With no annotations, description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Existing file or directory path' but does not explain what 'reveal' entails (e.g., opening Finder, selecting the item, focusing the window). The return type is noted but lacks detail on side effects or prerequisites.

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?

Description is extremely concise with a clear one-line purpose and structured Args/Returns sections. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the key action.

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 one parameter and an output schema, the description meets minimum viability but lacks behavioral context (e.g., what 'reveal' does). The existing output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the description could still be more informative about the action's effect.

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?

The description adds 'Existing file or directory path' to the single parameter 'path', which is a string in the schema. This clarifies that the path must be valid, compensating for the schema's lack of description (0% coverage). Could be more specific about path format but is generally helpful.

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?

Description clearly states it reveals a file or directory in Finder, a specific action on a specific resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like copy, move, or find operations.

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 versus alternatives like get_finder_selection or other file operations. Use must be inferred from the tool name.

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