reconnect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently outlines the sequence: detach current session, re-establish adb forwarding, and reconnect. It also clarifies what the tool does not do (e.g., restart the app or call execute). This is sufficient for a recovery tool.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, procedure, post-usage instructions. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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 simplicity, the description is fairly complete. It explains when to use, what it does, and what to do after. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., adb availability) and error conditions. The existence of an output schema offsets the need to describe return values.

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, and the schema description coverage is 100% (no parameters to describe). Per guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning beyond the empty 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: reconnect to the gadget after an app crash. It specifies the verb (reconnect) and resource (gadget), and distinguishes from siblings like 'connect' and 'detach' by contextualizing the usage scenario (post-crash) and outlining the steps performed.

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 provides explicit context ('after an app crash') and post-usage instructions ('restart the target app and call execute() again'). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or comparison to alternatives, which would strengthen this dimension.

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