android_google_services

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

No annotations provided, so the description is the sole source. It explains the extraction sources (google-services.json, resources.arsc, strings.xml) but does not disclose return format, side effects, or whether the APK is modified. The description is adequate but lacks some behavioral details.

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 only two sentences, efficiently covering the main purpose and optional behavior with no superfluous words. It is well front-loaded.

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 has 2 parameters and no output schema. The description explains the extraction process but does not specify the output format for the default case (only mentioning structured output for smali_folder). It also lacks prerequisites (e.g., need for apktool). Somewhat incomplete for an extraction tool.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions, and the description adds meaningful context: smali_folder enables structured strings.xml parsing. This goes beyond the schema, justifying a score above baseline 3.

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 it extracts Google and Firebase configuration from an APK, using a specific verb ('extracts') and resource ('APK'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like android_secrets_scanner or apk_manifest_analyzer by focusing on Google services.

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 by detailing the extraction process and the optional smali_folder, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like android_api_extractor or when not to use it.

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