apple_keynote_export

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds concrete behavioral context beyond them: the overwrite gate for existing destinations and the warning that large exports can exceed the automation timeout. It does not say what happens to a partially written file on timeout, which is the one remaining gap.

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 front-loaded sentences covering output formats, prerequisites, and the failure mode, with no filler. The most actionable constraint (parent directory must exist) comes before the timeout caveat.

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 destructive, non-idempotent export tool with no output schema and only 25% schema coverage, the description covers formats, destination preconditions, overwrite behavior, and timeout risk. It stops short of stating where the exported artifact lands or any permission requirements.

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 only 25% (documentName alone is described), so the description must compensate and largely does: it explains the parent-directory precondition for path and the semantics of overwrite (needed when the destination already exists). format is only covered indirectly by naming PDF and Microsoft Office output.

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 (Export) and resource (Keynote) and enumerates the output formats (PDF or supported Microsoft Office format), which matches the schema's pdf/pptx enum. An agent can immediately distinguish this from apple_keynote_save or apple_keynote_close.

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?

The description gives real prerequisites (parent directory must exist, overwrite:true for existing destinations) but never states when to choose this over siblings like apple_pages_export/apple_numbers_export or over a plain save. Usage is implied by the export purpose rather than routed explicitly.

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