select_device

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing about effects. It doesn't say whether the selection persists across calls or is per-session, whether it fails on an unknown serial, or whether it changes state for subsequent sibling tools like tap or screenshot.

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?

It is a single well-formed sentence with the condition front-loaded and no wasted words. Brevity is appropriate here, though the space saved is not redirected to anything informative.

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?

For a state-changing selection tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an entirely undocumented parameter, the description leaves too much out. An agent still lacks the serial's format and source, the persistence of the selection, and error behavior, all of which the definition alone must supply.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single parameter 'serial' has no title or description in the schema. The description does not compensate at all: it never says the argument is a device serial string, that it is required, or where to obtain a valid value (e.g. from list_devices).

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 states a specific verb ('Choose') and resource ('device to control'), making the tool's role legible. It only weakly differentiates from the sibling 'list_devices', which is the natural pairing, but an agent can still tell this is a selection action rather than a listing one.

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?

It gives one clear condition, 'when more than one is connected', so usage context is implied rather than fully spelled out. It never names 'list_devices' as the way to discover valid serials, and it doesn't say what to do if only one device is present or whether selection is required before other tools work.

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