Stop then launch on displays

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

The description explains the sequence of actions (force-stop then launch) and the target (each logical display). Annotations are minimal (all false) so the description carries the burden. It does not disclose potential side effects like killing the app or permission requirements, but adds some behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences front-loaded with the action and the use case. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool has 6 parameters, low schema coverage, and an output schema (not shown), the description is brief but covers the core behavior. It lacks details on error handling, behavior with invalid displayIds, or what happens if the activity is not found. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only 17%, with only displayIds having a description. The tool description does not explain other parameters like serial, userId, activity, settleMs, or packageName. It mentions 'main (or given) activity', which relates to the activity parameter, but overall it adds little meaning 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 force-stops a package and launches its activity on each logical display. It specifically mentions the use case for dual-display cold-start/flash reproduction, distinguishing it from siblings like mobile_app_launch or mobile_app_stop.

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 explicitly says 'Use for dual-display cold-start / flash reproduction', providing clear context. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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