save_article

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

无注解，因此描述承担了全部行为披露责任。描述了关键副作用：自动将 Markdown 转换为 HTML、在文件夹不存在时自动创建、并在末尾追加元数据（保存时间、标签、来源）。但未说明所需的权限、错误处理或操作是否可逆。

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?

单句描述，高效且前置信息丰富，涵盖了核心功能和主要行为特征。没有冗余内容。

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?

对于一个没有输出 schema 的写入工具，描述基本涵盖了主要行为，但缺少对返回结果、错误情况或可能失败原因的说明。鉴于有 5 个参数且无输出 schema，可以更完整。

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 描述覆盖率为 100%，因此每个参数的含义已在 schema 中清晰定义。描述没有为参数添加额外的语义信息，但也没有矛盾。根据规则，高 schema 覆盖率下基线为 3。

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?

描述明确陈述了动词（保存）、资源（技术文章）以及目标（Apple Notes 备忘录），并具体说明会自动转换 Markdown 为 HTML 并在指定文件夹创建笔记。与同级工具（list_articles、search_articles 等）有清晰区分，因为它是一个写入操作。

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?

隐含了使用场景：当需要将 AI 整理的 Markdown 文章保存到 Apple Notes 时使用。但没有明确说明何时不使用、与其他同级工具的关系，或调用前的先决条件。属于最低限度的可用指引。

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