collect_adb_bugreport

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

Adds real context beyond annotations: the multi-minute latency of collection and the fact that only configuration is left untouched while one new zip is written to the target directory — which reconciles the `readOnlyHint: false` / `idempotentHint: false` flags with the 'read-only' framing. Nothing here contradicts the annotations, but failure modes (no device, adb timeout, partial transfer) are unmentioned.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the operation and destination front-loaded ahead of the cost warning. Every clause carries information an agent cannot get from the schema alone.

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?

There is no output schema and the description never says what the call returns (zip path, artifact handle, or whether the result is retained in a project). Combined with the ambiguous phrase 'digesting the zip', an agent still lacks the post-call picture for a long-running, file-producing operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains `serial`, `output_directory`, and `analysis_project_id`. The description reinforces that the directory is caller-selected but adds no format, collision, or retention semantics beyond what the schema states.

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 (collect) and resource (a device-generated `adb bugreport` archive) and names the output destination, so it is immediately distinguishable from siblings like `read_adb_logcat` or `pull_adb_file`. Enumerating what the archive contains (dumpstate, dumpsys, logcat) confirms scope without ambiguity.

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 implies usage ('one device-generated bugreport archive', 'collection can take minutes') and thereby signals this is the heavyweight option, but it never states when to prefer it over `read_adb_logcat`, `pull_adb_file`, or `inspect_adb_device`. No exclusions or prerequisites (device connected, adb authorized) are given.

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