Search Shortcuts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it searches 'Siri Shortcuts' but does not elaborate on behavioral traits such as performance, rate limits, or result ordering. For a read-only tool with good annotations, the description is adequate but not exceptional.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, idempotent) and the presence of an output schema (not shown but noted), the description is complete. It covers what, how, and the resource, leaving no significant gaps.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'query', which already states 'Search keyword to match against shortcut names'. The tool description adds minimal value by specifying 'Siri Shortcuts' and 'name keyword', but essentially repeats the schema meaning.

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 clearly states 'Search Siri Shortcuts by name keyword', specifying the verb (search), resource (Siri Shortcuts), and scope (by name keyword). It distinguishes from siblings like list_shortcuts (list all) and get_shortcut_detail (get specific detail).

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 implies usage context (when searching by name) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_shortcuts or search_notes. No when-not scenarios or prerequisites are mentioned.

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