get_map

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full responsibility. It mentions the map is built automatically, implying it is a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness or detail other behaviors like output format. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences: first states main purpose, second elaborates on contents and usage. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key action.

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 zero parameters, an output schema exists (not shown), and complexity is low, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, its contents, and its purpose.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so description need not add parameter details. With 100% schema coverage (nonexistent params), baseline is 4, and description appropriately adds no extraneous param info.

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 returns the learned app map with specific contents (screens, transitions) and uses a verb 'Return' with a clear resource. It is well-distinguished from siblings 'get_logs' and 'tap_element'.

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 use for planning before interacting with the device ('so you can plan against a map before touching the device'). It does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives, but the context is clear.

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