shortcuts_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool opens the Shortcuts app for user inspection rather than executing the shortcut, which is useful, but it omits prerequisites (e.g., macOS/GUI availability), whether it blocks, and what the user or agent should expect after the app opens.

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 no wasted words. The purpose and the contrast with running the shortcut are conveyed immediately.

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 simple tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and usage. However, with an empty parameter schema, it never explains how the specific shortcut is identified or selected, which is a meaningful gap an agent may need to resolve.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is necessarily empty and parameter semantics are not applicable. The description appropriately does not invent parameter details, and baseline 4 applies for a correct no-parameter tool.

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 and resource ('Opens a shortcut in the Shortcuts app') and distinguishes the tool from its run sibling by framing it as inspection before execution. An agent can tell it apart from shortcuts_run without opening the schema.

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?

It clearly states the context: use this to inspect a shortcut's actions before running it with shortcuts_run. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name an alternative for listing shortcuts, but the primary usage condition is clear.

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