Android Permission Advisor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to reinforce safety. It adds value by specifying what data is returned (type, runtime request, etc.) without contradicting annotations. No contradiction present.

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, well-structured paragraph. It front-loads the purpose, then details return information, examples, and a special query. No redundant or wasted sentences.

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 absence of an output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return values and even includes a special query for runtime pattern. It covers all necessary contexts for a single-parameter, read-only 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description of the 'permission' parameter, including examples and special query hints. The description adds examples and usage guidance, but the schema already carries the semantic weight, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 is a 'Complete Android permissions reference' and lists the specific information it returns (type, runtime request, Play Store restrictions, request pattern). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like android_api_level_check or android_play_policy_advisor.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call before declaring any <uses-permission> in AndroidManifest.xml,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. While it doesn't mention when not to use or explicitly name alternatives, the context is strong enough for an agent to understand its role.

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