shortcuts

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations, notably that it uses the Shortcuts CLI without a TCC prompt and that id survives renames, though it does not discuss failure modes or limits.

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 compact and front-loaded: the primary list/search behavior comes first, followed by useful output pointers and the run_shortcut alternative. Every sentence contributes information.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter schema, existing output schema, and read-only annotations, the description supplies the remaining context an agent needs: filtering behavior, output field meanings, CLI/no-prompt behavior, and how to invoke a shortcut via the sibling 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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does so by explaining that `name` is a search filter and that an empty value lists all shortcuts, which is sufficient for a single optional string parameter, though matching semantics such as substring vs exact are not stated.

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: list/search Shortcuts by name, with empty meaning list all. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from run_shortcut, which handles invocation rather than listing.

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 explains that passing a name searches/filters and empty lists all, and points to run_shortcut for invoking a shortcut. The alternative is named, though there is no broader when-not guidance or edge-case exclusion.

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