apple_keynote_list_slides

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the returned text is bounded, and which content types are NOT surfaced. It does not discuss permissions or failure modes, so it is not a full 5.

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 with zero filler; the positive capability statement comes first, followed by the scope exclusion and the bounding note. Every sentence carries information.

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 partially compensates by naming the returned fields (indexes, default title/body text, notes, skipped status). But the pagination parameters and how the bounded text is truncated are unaddressed, leaving gaps for a list-type tool with 3 parameters.

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 33%: only documentName is documented ("Exact name returned by list_documents; ambiguous duplicate names are rejected"). The limit and offset parameters, which control pagination, are undocumented in both the schema and the description, so the agent gets no guidance on paging through slides.

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?

"Read slide indexes, default title/body text, presenter notes and skipped status" states a specific verb and resource and enumerates exactly what is returned, which an agent can distinguish from write-side siblings like apple_keynote_add_slide or apple_keynote_update_slide. It doesn't explicitly name or contrast an alternative sibling, so it stops short of 5.

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 negative scope clause ("Does not extract other text boxes, charts, images, or media") tells the agent when this tool is insufficient, which is useful. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over apple_keynote_open or a generic read tool, so usage is largely implied.

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