One-shot transparent setup

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: proxy setup, CA installation, iptables rules, zero dialogs, default loopback+tunnel, and NAT compatibility. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with core action. Every sentence contributes unique information. Minimal and effective.

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?

No output schema, but description covers the setup process and key behaviors. Lacks details on idempotency or failure handling, but adequate for a setup tool.

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 67%; serial parameter undocumented. Description adds meaning for hostIp ('LAN IP... omit for loopback + tunnel'). Port description in schema is sufficient.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: start proxy, install CA, enable transparent iptables capture. Differentiates from siblings like adb_set_proxy and adb_enable_transparent by emphasizing 'transparent' and 'zero on-device dialogs'.

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?

Provides usage context: 'Catches apps that ignore the system proxy (e.g. VK).' Describes default behavior and the hostIp option. Does not explicitly name alternatives but implies when this tool is appropriate.

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