apple_pages_list_documents

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds a meaningful behavioral detail beyond those annotations: it will not launch a stopped application, so the agent knows the app must already be running.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the key operational constraint. No wasted wording.

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 simple list tool, the description covers purpose and the app-running precondition, and annotations cover safety. But it omits any explanation of pagination behavior or what the list returns, and there is no output schema to fill that gap.

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?

The description mentions no parameters at all. With two parameters (limit, offset) and 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter documentation; it adds no meaning about pagination, defaults, or constraints.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'List open Pages documents.' It also scopes the result to open documents, which separates it from tools that open or create documents. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other document-reading siblings such as apple_pages_read_text.

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 statement 'Does not launch a stopped application' implies a usage constraint: this tool is only for an already-running Pages app. But it does not explicitly name the alternative (e.g., apple_pages_open) or state when to prefer this over read_text or other list tools.

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