as_avd_start

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

The description mentions 'detached' mode and optional wait-boot, which are behavioral details beyond annotations. However, it does not cover side effects like starting an AVD that may already be running, or resource consumption. Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description carries the burden but only partially addresses it.

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 first sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, the second paragraph ('Args:', 'Returns:') redundantly repeats information already available in the input schema and output schema, adding unnecessary length without new value.

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 basic behavior but lacks details on error cases (e.g., AVD not found, port conflicts) and timeout behavior. It does mention the return format (JSON with pid/serial), which adds completeness. Overall, it is minimally sufficient but not thorough.

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 merely lists parameter names without adding semantics beyond what the input schema already provides (schema descriptions are detailed). Since schema coverage is 0% (description adds no new information), it falls short of compensating, though the schema itself is comprehensive.

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 purpose: 'Boot an AVD in the emulator (detached) and optionally wait for boot.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the behavior (detached mode, optional wait) distinguishes it from sibling tools like as_avd_list or as_avd_stop.

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 provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or restrictions. It only describes what the tool does, not the context of its usage.

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