android_tap

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description doesn't need to repeat that. It adds no extra context about potential side effects (e.g., triggering navigation, changing state) beyond the suggestion to inspect the UI first. This is acceptable but not enriching.

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 extremely concise, containing only two short sentences. Every word serves a purpose: the first states the action, the second provides a caution. No fluff or redundant 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?

For a simple tool, the description covers the essential action and a precaution, but it lacks important context such as coordinate system details, whether the tap is absolute or relative, and how this differs from similar tools. Given the simple nature, a 3 is appropriate.

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 description does not explain the meaning of x and y beyond 'screen coordinate.' It does not specify units (pixels), origin (top-left), or any coordinate system details. The schema only provides numeric bounds, leaving the agent to infer the semantics from the name alone.

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 action: 'Tap a screen coordinate.' It is specific and aligns with the tool name. The additional instruction to inspect UI or screenshot first adds context but doesn't obscure the purpose.

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 provides a general guideline to inspect the UI or screenshot before tapping, which implies you need visual context. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternative tools like android_ui_click or android_long_press, leaving the choice to the agent based on implicit differences.

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