Run Shortcut

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint and non-idempotency, and the description adds a valuable specific warning about UI prompts and system actions. It also discloses that the shortcut's output is returned. This goes beyond the annotations, though the phrase 'system actions' is slightly generic.

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 composed of four short, information-dense sentences with zero fluff. The primary action is front-loaded, and each additional sentence adds a distinct detail (input, output, side-effect warning).

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?

Even without an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, how to invoke it (by name), optional input, return value, and potential side effects. For a 2-parameter tool with rich annotations, this is complete and sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters ('exact match' and 'Optional text input'). The description merely echoes the input parameter with 'Optionally provide text input' and adds no new semantic meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Run a Siri Shortcut by name.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_shortcuts and specifies optional input and return value, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

Provides clear context: run a shortcut by name with optional text input. It doesn't explicitly state when to avoid this tool or name alternatives, but the purpose is self-evident and aligned with the sibling list (e.g., list_shortcuts for listing, run_shortcut for executing).

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