get_prop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full weight. It discloses the key behavioral trait — dual return shape (single value vs dict of all props) — which is genuinely useful. But it offers nothing on permissions, rate limits, error behavior for a missing property, or serial targeting semantics.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately followed by the conditional mode difference. Every clause earns its place with zero filler.

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 2-param read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core call pattern and return shape but leaves the 'serial' parameter and any behavioral constraints undocumented. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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% and neither parameter is documented in the schema. The description explains 'name' behavior well (omit to get all), but 'serial' — a meaningful parameter selecting the target device — is completely unmentioned in both description and 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?

States a specific verb ('Read') plus the resource ('system property by name'), and explicitly distinguishes the two modes (single prop vs ALL props when name is omitted). The mention of parsing `getprop` grounds it against the large sibling set, including nearby tools like get_device_properties and set_prop.

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 implicitly clarifies when to call with vs without 'name' (omitting name returns all). However it gives no guidance on when to use this over get_device_properties or get_setting, despite those siblings clearly overlapping. No exclusions or alternative routing.

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