android_record_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the max_seconds hard cap (180s), the device default, and that size shrinks the capture. It could add more about side effects or failure modes, but the disclosed traits are meaningful.

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 short and front-loaded, with a one-line purpose, a workflow sentence, and a compact args list. No filler; every sentence earns its place.

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 start tool paired with android_record_stop, the description covers the invocation and workflow sufficiently. It lacks explicit notes on invalid inputs or output handling, but with no output schema those are less critical.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by adding meaning to all three parameters: device default, max_seconds cap, and size format/purpose. This goes well beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Start recording the screen', a specific verb-resource pair, and names the companion android_record_stop, which distinguishes it from siblings like android_screenshot and android_ui_dump. The purpose is immediately clear.

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?

It provides explicit workflow guidance: record first, interact, then stop. However, it does not state when to prefer recording over alternatives like screenshots or when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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