Build, switch Wi-Fi, and deploy

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It outlines the full sequence of actions and notes that Wi-Fi restoration happens even after failure. It also mentions the background job and early return. Could add more detail on build failure handling, but it is fairly transparent.

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 concise, front-loading the key actions, and every sentence contributes meaningful information. No wasted words.

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 complexity (11 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main workflow and mentions the important detail of returning before network switch. It could mention what the job ID is used for (likely with wifi_deploy_status), but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand.

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 input schema covers all 11 parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds minimal parameter context beyond what the schema provides, but it does mention the job ID return and the 'dryRun' preview feature, which adds value. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: builds TeamCode, switches Wi-Fi to a Control Hub profile, deploys APK, restarts Robot Controller, and restores original Wi-Fi. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the Wi-Fi switching and background job, which is unique among the sibling tools.

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 for deploying to a robot over Wi-Fi with network switching, and mentions returning before network switch so AI can get job ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like build_and_deploy or deploy_robot.

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