list_dex_classes

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

The description discloses the return format (FQN, access flags, counts) and implies a read operation, but lacks details on error handling, side effects, or authorization needs. Without annotations, it partially fulfills transparency but leaves gaps.

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 concise sentences front-load the purpose and output, with no redundant or extraneous content. Every sentence adds value.

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 lack of annotations, the description should compensate. It misses parameter documentation and usage context, making it incomplete for autonomous agents despite having an output schema.

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 one required parameter 'path' with no description, and the tool description does not clarify its meaning. With 0% schema coverage, this is a critical omission for correct invocation.

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 lists all classes in a Dalvik DEX file and specifies return data (FQN, access flags, method/field counts). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_dex_methods' which lists methods.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or constraints. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent without context for appropriate usage.

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