keynote_export_pdf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions 'frontmost' indicating it acts on a specific presentation, but it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting an existing PDF, needing permissions, behavior if Keynote is not running). The description is minimal.

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 very short and front-loaded with the main action. Both sentences earn their place, but the overall under-specification prevents a perfect score; it is concise but somewhat too sparse.

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 export tool, the description is minimal. It does not explain failure modes, prerequisites, or what happens if the destination exists. Although an output schema exists, the description omits critical behavioral context, making it incomplete for an agent to use reliably.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only restates the parameter as 'destination: path of the PDF to write.' This adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Destination' title, but does not compensate for the lack of schema-level description or clarify constraints like file extension or permissions.

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 a specific action: 'Export the frontmost Keynote presentation to PDF.' It identifies the verb ('Export'), the resource ('frontmost Keynote presentation'), and the output format ('PDF'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like pages_export.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., Keynote running, having a presentation open) or contrast with sibling tools like pages_export. The only implicit clue is the tool name.

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