Opens Keynote, PPTX, or PPT files by copying them into Atril's workspace, preserving the original; if the file is already there, opens that copy directly.
Abre una presentación (.key, .pptx o .ppt) haciendo primero una COPIA en la carpeta de trabajo de Atril; el original nunca se toca. Si la ruta ya está en la carpeta de trabajo, abre esa copia directamente.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ruta | Yes | ruta absoluta (o con ~) de la presentación |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses the key side effect: a copy is created in the working folder and the original is never touched. It also clarifies idempotent behavior for paths already in the working folder, though it omits error handling or response details.
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?
Two tight sentences with zero waste; the copy-first guarantee and the already-local shortcut are both front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.
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 one-parameter mutation-like tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical behavioral context: format support, copy creation, original safety, and the local-path shortcut. Minor gaps like invalid-path behavior remain, but the essential calling context is present.
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 100% and the single parameter is already documented as an absolute or ~ path. The description adds only contextual behavior about paths already in the working folder, not additional syntax or semantics beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource ("Abre una presentación") and enumerates supported formats (.key, .pptx, .ppt). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like crear, leer_presentacion, or cerrar because it describes opening with a copy-on-open workflow.
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?
It specifies one conditional behavior (if the path is already in the working folder, open that copy directly), but does not say when to use this versus alternatives such as leer_presentacion or crear. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.