adb reverse tunnel

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It explains the tunneling mechanism ('device 127.0.0.1:<port> -> host') and a key benefit ('Bypasses host firewall/NAT'). It does not detail persistence or failure modes, but the core behavior is well communicated.

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 extremely concise, with two sentences and a short clause. It is front-loaded with the main action and immediately provides usage context. No unnecessary words.

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 the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers purpose and usage context but omits return values, side effects, and parameter details (especially 'serial'). The presence of sibling tools suggests more steps may be needed, but the description is fairly complete for a simple tunnel setup.

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 50% (port described, serial not). The description only hints at the 'port' parameter via example, but does not explain 'serial' at all. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation, leaving agents uninformed about the serial parameter.

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 action ('Tunnel') and the resource ('proxy port back to the device over the adb channel'), specifying direction from device to host. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on reverse tunneling, which is a distinct operation.

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 explicitly mentions when to use the tool ('emulators behind their own NAT') and gives a follow-up step ('set the device proxy to 127.0.0.1:<port>'). It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context of sibling tools implies such differentiation.

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