get_ui_hierarchy

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 only mentions the deprecated alias and the UIWindow/UIView tree source, but does not disclose what the tool returns, whether it is read-only, potential errors, or deprecation consequences (e.g., may be removed). This is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the key fact (deprecated alias) and includes the tree source, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

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 (no params, no output schema), the description covers the essential guidance to avoid using it in favor of `inspect_ui`. However, it does not describe what the tool actually returns or any behavior, leaving the agent without a full picture if it were to use it. The deprecation warning helps, but completeness is moderate.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage (vacuously). The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none is needed.

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 states it is a 'Deprecated alias of inspect_ui' and mentions 'current App UIWindow/UIView tree', which clearly indicates the tool retrieves the UI hierarchy. However, it does not explicitly state what the tool returns or directly define its function beyond being an alias, so it is clear but not fully independent of the sibling tool.

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 explicitly labels the tool as 'Deprecated alias of inspect_ui', which strongly implies that users should use `inspect_ui` instead. This provides an explicit alternative and exclusion, making the usage guidance very clear.

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