apple_numbers_save

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and idempotent=false, and the description usefully adds the precondition (parent dir must exist) and the overwrite requirement covering the current document. The 'TextEdit saves RTF' sentence is confusing and appears borrowed from a sibling tool, muddying the behavior story slightly.

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 and the overwrite rule. The final 'TextEdit saves RTF; no implicit format conversion' sentence is off-topic noise for a Numbers tool that does not earn its place.

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 mutation with no output schema, the description covers key preconditions (parent directory, overwrite for existing paths) but omits what happens on success/failure and whether documentName must already exist. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 33% (only documentName is documented), so the description must compensate. It explains the overwrite parameter's semantics and the path precondition, but says nothing about the path format beyond '.numbers', leaving half the parameters thinly covered.

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 concrete verb+resource ('Save Numbers to a .numbers path') and distinguishes itself from the TextEdit save path by noting RTF behavior. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling apple_numbers_export or apple_numbers_open.

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?

Gives a conditional usage rule: existing paths, including the current document path, require overwrite:true, and the parent directory must already exist. It stops short of naming an alternative (e.g., export for other formats), so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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