input

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It mentions actions and associated parameters but discloses no behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, permissions, error behavior). For a complex input tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists action-parameter mappings. No redundancy, though it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 19 parameters, 6 sibling tools, and no output schema, the description is too incomplete. It omits return values, platform-specific behavior (e.g., iOS vs Android), and when to use each action. Much context is missing.

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 95%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping parameters per action (e.g., 'coords or text/id/label/index' for tap), but does not cover all 19 parameters (e.g., hints, platform). It improves on the schema but not extensively.

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 tool handles input actions and lists specific actions (tap, double_tap, etc.), making it distinct from sibling tools like 'device' or 'ui'. However, it lacks a strong verb indicating what the tool does (e.g., 'performs' or 'simulates').

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ui' or 'device'. The description merely lists actions without explaining contexts or exclusions.

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