as_avd_create

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

Beyond annotations (which indicate mutation via readOnlyHint=false), the description reveals that the tool requires a confirm parameter to produce an AVD, and returns a JSON string or 'confirmation_required'. This provides insight into the creation flow. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise at three sentences, front-loading the purpose, then covering prerequisite, arguments, and return value. No extraneous text. Each sentence serves a clear function.

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?

The description covers the core creation purpose, prerequisite, parameter list, and return value. It does not mention error handling (e.g., if system image is missing) or what happens on duplicate names, but it is sufficient for a non-complex tool with an output schema. Slightly more detail could improve completeness.

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 simply lists the parameters from the input schema (name, system_image, device, confirm) without adding additional meaning or constraints. Since the schema itself has detailed descriptions for each parameter, the description adds minimal value beyond enumeration.

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 tool's action: 'Create a new Android Virtual Device from an installed system image.' It uses a specific verb ('create') and resource ('Android Virtual Device'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like as_avd_list or as_avd_start by focusing on creation.

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 explicit context by mentioning the prerequisite: 'The system image must already be installed (use as_sdk_install with e.g. 'system-images;android-34;google_apis;x86_64').' This guides the user to a related tool. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or compare to sibling AVD tools like as_avd_delete.

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