device_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get information' without explaining what information is returned, whether any permissions are required, or what the response format is. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's name, which 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence making it concise in size. However, it is under-specified and lacks useful detail, so it does not fully earn its place. It is not verbose, but it could be more informative without significantly increasing length.

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 that there are no annotations and no output schema, the description needs to compensate by explaining what 'information' includes. It does not mention device model, OS version, or any specifics, and the lack of an output schema makes the return value uncertain. This incompleteness is problematic when selecting among sibling tools.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered (100% coverage). The description appropriately adds no parameter details because there are none to describe. This aligns with the baseline of 4 for parameterless tools.

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 clear verb and resource ('Get information about the connected device'), which is more than a tautology. However, 'information' is vague and does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_screen_size or get_ui_tree, which also provide device-related information. The purpose is clear at a high level but lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context, exclusions, or mention of other tools, leaving the agent without direction for selecting this tool among the many siblings listed.

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