device.wake_unlock

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that it wakes the screen, only unlocks when the lock is non-secure, and cleans leftover dialogs, plus that this is agent-side setup rather than human interaction. It omits failure behavior (e.g., what happens with a secure lockscreen), side effects, and whether it is idempotent.

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 dense sentence with the primary action front-loaded and the scope note in parentheses. Nothing is wasted, though the phrasing is terse enough that subtleties (ordering of the three steps, conditional unlock) require careful reading.

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 zero-parameter, annotation-free tool with no output schema, the description identifies what the routine does but leaves gaps around preconditions (secure vs non-secure lockscreen), return signals, and error states that an agent orchestrating this setup step would want to know.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter semantics to document. The description correctly describes a no-argument behavior without inventing parameters.

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 names a concrete multi-step action (turn on screen, dismiss non-secure lockscreen, clear residual popups) with a clear verb-plus-resource pattern. It distinguishes itself from the surrounding ui.* / input.* siblings by being a self-setup routine rather than an interactive automation step. It stops short of full 5 because the naming convention (dotted namespace) is not explained.

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 parenthetical '(agent 自身 setup，非人工干预)' implies this is a preparatory step the agent runs for itself, which gives implicit when-to-use context. However, it never states when it should be called relative to alternatives (e.g., before app.launch or input.* sequences) nor any conditions that would make it unnecessary.

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