Add shortcut

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

The annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention side effects, permission requirements, or the effect on existing shortcuts. Since the description carries no extra value beyond the annotations, the score is low.

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 concise at two sentences, but the first sentence ('Add shortcut') merely restates the title and adds no information. The second sentence provides the core purpose. It is efficient in length but wastes a sentence on redundancy.

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 write operation with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what a shortcut is, what values name and path should take, whether the path is remote or local, or any side effects. An agent cannot confidently invoke this tool based on the provided description.

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%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only implies that 'hostId' refers to a specific host, but it does not explain the meaning of 'name' or 'path'. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal semantic value and fails to address the coverage gap.

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 clear verb ('Adds') and resource ('a shortcut for a specific host'), distinguishing it from read-only sibling tools like termix_hosts_get_shortcuts. It is specific enough to convey the basic function, though it does not elaborate on what a 'shortcut' entails.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when adding a shortcut is appropriate, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description simply states the action without any usage context.

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