keynote_layouts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It reveals key behavior: the tool lists layouts, and that the names are localized (a potential failure mode if using English on non-English systems). It does not explicitly state 'no side effects,' but the verb 'List' implies a read-only operation. The localization caveat adds real value beyond the obvious behavior.

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 short paragraphs, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a precise usage note. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it states what is listed, where from, when to use it, and the critical localization caveat. No additional context is needed for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed in the description. Per the rubric, the baseline for 0 params is 4; the description does not miss any required parameter semantics.

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 ('List') and resource ('slide layouts available on this Mac'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like keynote_create and keynote_export_pdf, which are the only Keynote-related siblings.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call this tool BEFORE keynote_create when a specific layout is needed, explaining that names are localized and English names fail on non-English systems. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and a direct connection to the alternative tool.

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