quick_action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to indicate whether actions are destructive (e.g., overwrite files), require permissions, or have side effects like modifying input files. The description does not convey any safety information, which is critical for a tool with actions like 'compress_images' that likely alter files.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it may be too brief to be fully informative. It is front-loaded but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 tool with 3 parameters (one nested object) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits details about return values (e.g., success/failure), expected output files, or behavior for long-running actions like video conversion. The nested 'options' parameter suggests complexity that the description does not address.

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 documentation covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, which already explains each parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema suffices.

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 'Run a predefined quick action' clearly states the tool's purpose of executing one of several fixed actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'run_applescript' or 'create_workflow' which involve custom scripts or workflow creation. However, it does not list the specific actions available, leaving some ambiguity about the resource being used.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'list_actions' (to see available actions) or 'run_applescript' (for custom scripts). It lacks any context about prerequisites, when not to use it, or alternatives. The single sentence offers no usage direction.

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