apple_finder_reveal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's only added behavioral detail is the constraint that only 'allowed' paths can be revealed, which is useful but leaves open what happens on success (Finder window opens? item selected?) and on a disallowed path.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves room for one more clause of operational detail.

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 tool with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description should carry more: what 'reveal' does concretely, what the response contains, and what the 'allowed' restriction means. Annotations cover safety but not behavior, so gaps remain.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single 'path' parameter, and the description only says it is a 'file or folder' path. It does not clarify whether the path must be absolute, POSIX-style, tilde-expanded, or relative to an allowed root.

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?

States a specific verb ('reveal') and resource ('file or folder in Finder'), and the word 'allowed' hints at a permission scope. It is clear enough for an agent, though it does not fully distinguish itself from nearby siblings like apple_finder_selection or apple_files_info.

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 guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as apple_files_info (inspect metadata) or opening the file in its app. The agent must infer the use case from the verb alone.

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