rescue_scrcpy_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool reports availability and version, which implies a read-only status check rather than a mutation. However, it does not explain how the scrcpy_path parameter affects behavior or what happens when the binary is missing.

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 compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and adds a parenthetical with the two key output aspects, so every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return-value details are less necessary. However, the complete absence of parameter guidance and usage context leaves an agent uncertain about how to invoke the tool correctly, especially when deciding whether to supply scrcpy_path.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for its only parameter, and the description makes no mention of scrcpy_path. The parameter name gives some clue, but the tool description does not explain whether this path is required, optional, or how it is used relative to the default system search.

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 identifies the resource (the official scrcpy binary on this machine) and the information returned (whether it exists and its version). It is not a tautology and is distinct in scope from sibling rescue commands, though it lacks an explicit action verb.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as rescue_probe or the mirror/OTG start tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions that should trigger this status check.

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