Manage apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does signal destructiveness through concrete verbs ("clear the data of," "uninstall"), which is meaningful. However, it never states that these operations are irreversible or destroy user data, nor does it note that non-list actions require a valid package name.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that enumerates the action-to-effect mapping with zero filler; the parenthetical action token is the only structural aid needed.

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 tool that mixes a safe read with three destructive operations and has no annotations or output schema, the description should disclose irreversibility and per-action parameter requirements. It covers the action vocabulary well but leaves those behavioral gaps for an agent to guess.

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 coverage is only 33% (only serial is documented), so the description must compensate, and it partly does: it explains the meaning of each action enum value and says the targeted app is identified "by package name." It stops short of stating that package is required for stop/clear/uninstall but ignored for list, and gives no package format example.

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 specific verbs (list, force-stop, clear data, uninstall) against a named resource (installed apps), and it explicitly binds the "list" action to its enum value. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like phone_install or phone_stop, but the verb/resource pair is 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?

Mapping each action word to its effect gives implied guidance about which action to pick, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus phone_install or phone_shell, and no prerequisites (e.g., that destructive actions need the app currently installed).

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