apple_keynote_create

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the document is unsaved, a window may appear (a UI side effect), and the caller must save explicitly. It does not cover failure modes such as permission prompts.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then side effects, then the follow-up requirement. No 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully notes that a name is returned and must be reused, which is the key piece of missing structured information. It leaves the theme parameter and any permission behavior unexplained, but covers what an agent needs to call and continue the workflow.

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?

There is one parameter (themeName) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions themes, defaults, or valid values. Since the schema does none of the work here, the description should have compensated and does not.

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 ('Create an unsaved Keynote document'), and the qualifier 'unsaved' implicitly separates it from apple_keynote_open, which opens existing files. It is clear but does not explicitly name the sibling it differs from.

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 gives workflow guidance ('Use the returned name for subsequent operations; save explicitly'), which tells the agent what to do next, but never says when to prefer create over apple_keynote_open or when not to call it. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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