list_keynote_apps

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must carry all behavioral disclosure, but it only states that apps are listed and a path recommended. It does not explain whether the tool scans the Applications directory, how missing defaults are handled, or any side effects, leaving key behaviors undocumented.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. The phrasing is slightly awkward ('recommended explicit app path'), but it remains economical.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two undocumented parameters, the description leaves too much unspecified: return format, parameter effects, and how this relates to the export workflow. An agent can guess its basic purpose but not confidently reason about correct invocation with the available booleans.

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%, and the description adds no meaning to the two boolean parameters (searchApplicationsDir, includeMissingDefaults). The parameter names are only weakly self-explanatory, and the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('installed Keynote-like macOS apps') and adds the distinctive output ('recommended explicit app path for native export'). This distinguishes it from the export/harvest siblings, though 'Keynote-like' and 'native export' remain somewhat vague.

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 phrase 'for native export' implies this tool is meant to precede export_keynote_to_pdf, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or statement of when to prefer siblings such as list_harvest_outputs. Usage context is only implied, not stated.

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