Import local files into Apple Photos, optionally into an album, while keeping duplicate checks and allowing iCloud Photos upload.
Import existing local files into Photos, optionally into an album. Duplicate checking remains enabled; imported media may upload to iCloud Photos.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| paths | Yes | ||
| albumId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: duplicate checking stays enabled and imports may sync to iCloud Photos. It does not mention permission requirements or whether source files are copied vs. moved.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the two behavioral caveats. No filler, though 'remains enabled' is slightly indirect phrasing.
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?
No output schema exists, and annotations cover the safety profile, so the remaining burden is behavioral disclosure. The description covers the two highest-value surprises (duplicate detection, iCloud sync); missing only source-handling semantics (copy vs. move) and permission needs.
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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It implies that 'paths' are local filesystem paths (not URLs) and that 'albumId' targets an optional album, but it never names the parameters or notes the 20-item cap or the 4096-character path limit.
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+resource: importing local files into Photos, with an optional album target. This distinguishes it from the direction-opposite apple_photos_export and from apple_photos_add_to_album (which handles items already in the library), though neither sibling is named explicitly.
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?
Usage is implied by 'existing local files' — the agent can infer this is for filesystem sources rather than library items — but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. apple_photos_add_to_album guidance and no prerequisites or exclusions stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.