list_devices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states the tool lists devices but does not clarify the meaning of 'connected' (e.g., via ADB), whether it is read-only, or the format of the returned data. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 that front-loads the key action and resource. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundant or irrelevant information.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides the essential context of listing devices. However, it could be more complete by mentioning what the output contains (e.g., device identifiers) or any prerequisites. As is, it is slightly lacking but mostly sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (empty), so no additional parameter information is needed from the description. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not add anything beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'all connected Android and iOS devices'. This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like 'get_device' (which targets a specific device) and 'install_app', making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage when the agent needs to obtain the list of currently connected devices, but it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling tool names.

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