apple_textedit_set_text

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

Goes beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true) by naming the specific casualty — existing rich formatting — and disclosing autosave/sync side effects. That is exactly the kind of consequence an agent needs before overwriting user content.

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, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the destructive consequence is stated early. The closing Pages sentence is the one item whose relevance to a TextEdit tool is not self-evident, so it costs a little precision.

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 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, annotations already cover safety and the description adds the formatting-loss and autosave consequences. Remaining gaps (permission prerequisites, whether the document must already be open) are minor but real.

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%, with just documentName carrying an inline description. The description names the two mode behaviors implicitly ('Replace or append'), which partially compensates, but adds no detail on text length limits or documentName resolution beyond what the schema already states.

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 pair (replace/append) and resource (TextEdit plain text), which cleanly separates it from apple_textedit_read_text and apple_pages_set_text. The trailing note about Pages weakens focus slightly since this is a TextEdit tool, but the core action remains unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings, nor when to prefer replace vs append beyond the schema enum. The Pages sentence hints at an applicability boundary but is not framed as a when-to-use condition.

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