inspect_supershift_apk

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what side effects it has, or any prerequisites. It only states what it inspects, missing behavioral context that annotations would normally provide.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks essential detail. It does not earn its place because it omits parameter context and usage guidance. Acceptable for a simple overview but insufficient for effective tool use.

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?

Despite having an output schema (context signal), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of the three parameters or the context in which this tool should be used. For a tool with 3 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description does not compensate.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. 'aapt_path' and 'manifest_path' are not mentioned; the user is left to guess what 'aapt' is and why a manifest path is needed. This adds no value beyond the schema.

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 the tool inspects a Supershift APK for package, split, permission, and manifest evidence. The verb 'inspect' and resource are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'install_supershift_apks' and 'dump_supershift_ui'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions or when this tool is appropriate compared to siblings like 'pull_supershift_data' or 'supershift_reverse_engineering_report'.

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