Kasra Get Desktop Shortcuts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly address side-effect profile, authorization requirements, rate limits, or behavior related to the optional 'reason' parameter. This is a moderate gap for a simple getter.

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 short and front-loaded, stating the resource immediately. The bilingual duplication is mildly redundant but not excessive, and every substantive clause contributes to identifying 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?

For a simple getter with an output schema, the core resource is identified and basic invocation is possible. However, the undefined 'reason' parameter and the lack of differentiation from sibling retrieval tools leave meaningful gaps in the agent's ability to use this tool correctly in context.

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 only parameter, 'reason', has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned anywhere in the tool description. An agent has no way to determine whether the parameter is required, what values it accepts, or what effect it has on the result.

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 ('Get') and a specific resource ('user desktop shortcuts and bookmarked pages'), making the target clear. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like kasra_get_user_menu or kasra_get_dashboard_summary, so it narrowly misses the top score.

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?

There is no guidance about when to invoke this tool or when to prefer an alternative. The description only restates what the tool retrieves, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and siblings.

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