Get Phone Link Status

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

Annotations declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds concrete context: the exact boolean fields returned and the specific failure mode (connected=false when Phone Link is not running). This goes beyond the annotations to set accurate expectations.

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 front-loaded with purpose and usage, then organized into a return block and error handling section. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or redundant explanation.

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?

With no output schema present, the description fully documents the return payload and failure behavior. It also covers prerequisites, fallback action, and what to expect, making the tool completely self-contained for an agent to call correctly.

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 input schema has zero parameters and the description confirms 'No parameters required.' With no parameters to elaborate, the baseline of 4 is appropriate; the description doesn't need to add extra parameter detail.

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 'Get' and resource 'connection status of Phone Link (MyPhone) and basic phone info', clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like phonelink_get_photos and phonelink_get_messages. The scope is explicit and leaves no ambiguity about what this tool returns.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this as the first tool call to verify Phone Link availability before using other tools. It also names phonelink_launch_app as the alternative when the app isn't running, giving clear when-to-use and fallback guidance.

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