clash.verge.preferences.configure_hotkeys

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: nonce-based confirmation, allowlist of function names, Tauri accelerator syntax, rejection of reserved combos and duplicates, and required capability. No contradictions.

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 well-organized with front-loaded purpose and detailed constraints. It is relatively long but each sentence provides necessary information. Could be slightly tightened without losing clarity.

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 complex tool with 5 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers the process, constraints, and required capability well. It could mention return structure (e.g., success/failure indication) for completeness.

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 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds context about the two-step workflow and constraints beyond schema, but does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameter semantics beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Modify' and resource 'Clash Verge hotkey mapping', distinguishing it from sibling tools like configure_theme or configure_layout which target other preference areas.

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 explains the two-step confirmation process, allowlist restrictions, Tauri syntax requirement, and rejection conditions. While it implies hotkey context, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools for similar modifiable settings.

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