get_open_documentsList the PDFs open in Skim, frontmost first, with name, path, page count, and current page.
List the PDFs open in Skim, frontmost first: name, path, page count, current page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the ordering guarantee ('frontmost first') and the exact fields returned including 'current page'.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and the field enumeration is a compact literal list. No wasted words.
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?
A zero-parameter read tool with a full output schema and complete annotations needs very little prose; the description covers what is listed, the ordering, and the source application. An agent has everything required to call it correctly.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Nothing in the description needs to explain inputs, and the listed fields describe the output rather than a parameter.
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?
Specific verb and resource ('List the PDFs open in Skim') with the result set enumerated, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling get_reading_context, which is the one tool an agent could plausibly confuse it with.
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 the resource description (call this when you need the currently open PDFs), but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative such as get_reading_context for reading state.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.