get_device_info

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

Describes the tool as a read operation with no destructive effects, and adds context about older apps dropping controls. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not cover rate limits or authentication needs, but the tool's simplicity reduces the need.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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?

Simple read tool with output schema present; description covers purpose, usage scenario, and related sibling. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

No parameters, so baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to add parameter info as the schema is already complete.

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?

Clearly states the tool reads the device's app version, build, and protocol version. Differentiates from siblings like check_sources and get_connection_status.

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?

Explicitly says to use for confirming app compatibility and references check_sources for full drift verdict, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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