run_shortcut

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and open-world behavior. Description adds case-insensitive name resolution and specific error handling (Error 1743), which are useful beyond annotations. Could mention return value or side effects, but current content is good.

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?

Three concise sentences. First defines action, second provides guidance to alternative tool, third explains error handling. No fluff, each sentence earns its place.

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?

Missing return value description (no output schema), but error handling and alternative tool reference compensate. Parameter coverage is complete. Overall sufficient for correct invocation.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. Description adds extra context: case-insensitivity for 'name', and explains the role of 'purpose' (builds annotations for discoverability). Adds value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it executes a macOS Shortcut by name with optional input. Distinguishes from sibling 'shortcuts_usage' by directing users to browse shortcuts if unsure. Also mentions case-insensitivity, adding specificity.

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 tells when to use alternative tool ('If unsure which shortcut to run, call shortcuts_usage...'). Also provides context for a common error (1743) and how to resolve it, guiding proper usage.

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