MCP Appium Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions execution but does not disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, potential side effects (e.g., device changes), error handling, or output format. This is inadequate for a tool that likely interacts with device systems.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and clear, though it could benefit from more detail given the tool's complexity.

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's potential complexity (executing arbitrary ADB commands), lack of annotations, no output schema, and incomplete behavioral disclosure, the description is insufficient. It does not provide enough context for safe or effective use, such as command examples, safety warnings, or expected results.

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 100%, with the parameter 'command' documented as 'The ADB command to execute (without 'adb' prefix).' The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the tool 'Execute[s] a custom ADB command,' which clearly indicates the verb (execute) and resource (ADB command). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'execute-mobile-command' or specify what ADB commands are suitable, making it vague in context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'execute-mobile-command' or other ADB-related siblings. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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