Import a file from a local disk path into Keep It, with optional tags, bundle, and folder assignment.
Import an existing file from disk into Keep It.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | Tags to apply | |
| bundle | No | Destination bundle name | |
| folder | No | Destination folder name | |
| file_path | Yes | Absolute file path on your Mac to import |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the import copies or moves the file, what happens if the file is already in the library, whether tags/bundle/folder are optional, or what permission or access constraints apply.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero padding. Nothing is wasted and the core action is immediately clear.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description must explain the mutation's effects and result, but it says nothing about what happens on success, whether it returns a reference to the imported item, or how errors (missing file, duplicate) are handled. Inadequate for a write tool.
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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 states a specific verb ('Import') and resource ('an existing file from disk into Keep It'), making the action unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from siblings, but no sibling performs an import, so the operation is inherently distinct.
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 use this versus creating a note or adding a link, and no mention of prerequisites such as the file needing to already exist on disk. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.