List Android displays

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

Annotations already establish the full safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description is not obligated to restate it. It adds modest scope context by saying results include correlated capture IDs, evidence, and focus state, but does not describe ordering, paging, or failure behavior.

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 with no wasted filler. It is appropriately terse, though the trailing 'with evidence and focus state' phrase is the least informative part and could be sharper.

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?

An output schema exists so return-value detail is not the description's job, and the only parameter is fully specified. What is missing is usage context relative to siblings, not structural coverage.

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%, and the single serial parameter is already well documented in the schema, including the 'never inferred when multiple devices exist' caveat. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (list) and resource (logical displays) and adds that physical capture IDs plus evidence and focus state are correlated. It is clear on its own but never distinguishes itself from display-adjacent siblings like mobile_screen_capture or mobile_app_relaunch_on_displays, and 'evidence' is undefined jargon.

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 explicit when-to-use, no prerequisite (e.g. needing a connected device first), and no mention of alternatives despite many displays/capture siblings. The intended invocation context is only implied by the name.

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