rotate_device

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the prerequisite but fails to describe the exact rotation behavior (e.g., toggles orientation vs. rotates by a fixed angle) or any side effects. The agent is left uncertain about the outcome.

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, concise sentence with no filler words. It efficiently communicates the action and a key prerequisite. No structural improvements are needed.

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 and lack of output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a critical condition. However, it omits details like return value (e.g., success flag) or orientation state after rotation, which would help an agent verify success.

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 parameter ('serial') with a description ('Device serial number') that is clear. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add more. Baseline score 3 is appropriate as the description neither clarifies nor obscures the parameter.

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 verb 'Rotate' and the resource 'device screen', making the action unambiguous. It also notes a prerequisite (active scrcpy session), which adds context. However, it does not specify the rotation direction (e.g., toggle or 90° clockwise), leaving some 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 provides a single usage condition ('requires active scrcpy session'), which is useful but insufficient. It does not indicate when to avoid using this tool (e.g., when no session exists) or suggest alternatives, even though siblings like 'screen_on' or 'tap' are unrelated.

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