screen_on

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. It's a wake action with no description of side effects or state changes.

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?

A single concise sentence, zero wasted text. The description is front-loaded and communicates the core purpose immediately.

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?

This is a very simple tool (1 optional parameter, single action, no nested objects, output schema present). The description is adequate for such a trivial operation. However, it could note that 'serial' is optional and which device it applies to when omitted, or clarify if this only affects the screen state as opposed to device locks.

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% (the single 'serial' parameter is documented as 'Device serial number'). The description doesn't add meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Wake the device screen (turn screen on)' uses a specific verb (wake/turn on) with a clear resource (device screen). It clearly distinguishes this tool from screen_off, its direct sibling, and from other device control tools.

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 when to use this tool (when you need to wake the device screen), but there's no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from screen_off. The sibling tools exist but no alternatives are named. Clear context but lacking exclusions.

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