list_adb_directory

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only', but annotations set readOnlyHint=false. This is a direct contradiction and is flagged. While the error handling note adds some context, the contradiction on the core safety profile is severe.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the action, the output fields, and error behavior without burying the lede.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description lists the returned fields and notes standard error recognition, which covers the essentials. However, the contradictory read-only claim undermines completeness for a tool whose annotations say otherwise.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces that device_path must be absolute and that serial is required, but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('List one absolute device directory') and enumerates the exact fields returned (names, kinds, permissions, owner, group, sizes, dates, symlink targets). This is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_adb_devices or inspect_adb_device, which operate on devices rather than a directory.

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 does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives such as inspect_adb_device or read_adb_logcat, nor does it give prerequisites beyond the implicit 'absolute device directory'. It provides no exclusions or routing guidance.

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