shortcut_library

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

With no annotations at all, the description must carry the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the per-mode return content and the conditional 'signed download link if published'. However, it never states that this is a read-only browse operation, whether auth is required for download links, or how large the list result can be.

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 short blocks, front-loaded with the resource and its scope, then the mode switch. Efficient overall, though the mid-sentence line breaks and the parenthetical '(or template config)' make it slightly denser than necessary.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description is the only source of return-value information; it covers detail mode (meta, spec, download link) but says nothing about the shape of list results, result limits, or pagination. Adequate to call correctly, incomplete for interpreting results.

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 0%, so the description has to compensate, and it largely does: `query` is defined as matching name/description/tags, and `slug` is defined as switching from list mode to detail mode with a specific payload. It adds real meaning over the bare, undocumented schema properties.

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 and resource ('Browse the community shortcut library') and gives concrete content scope (20+ ready shortcuts across categories). It implies a clear separation from siblings like shortcut_build/shortcut_inspect, but never names an alternative, so it stays short of a full 5.

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?

Explicitly defines the two modes: no slug → list matching entries, with slug → fetch that entry's meta/spec/download link. That is clear operational context, but there is no statement about when to prefer a sibling tool (e.g. shortcut_inspect or shortcut_from_template) instead.

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