Swipe Android display

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

Annotations indicate non-destructive and non-readOnly behavior, but the description adds little beyond stating it 'injects' a swipe. It does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., what happens if multiple displays), required permissions, or whether the operation blocks. The explicit duration is already captured by the durationMs parameter in the schema, so no added value.

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, front-loading the key purpose. It is concise with no redundancy. However, it may be too terse, sacrificing clarity on parameter semantics and usage context.

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 5 parameters (including nested objects), an output schema, and lacks schema descriptions for 60% of parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to construct the swipe (e.g., coordinate system, units), the role of serial and displayId, or what the output contains. The agent would need to rely on external knowledge.

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 40% (only serial and displayId have descriptions, but they are nested in properties). The description does not explain start, end, durationMs, or how they relate to the swipe gesture. For parameters like start and end (nested objects with x,y), the description provides no semantics beyond the schema field names.

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 identifies the tool as injecting a touchscreen swipe with explicit duration, and 'display-targeted' distinguishes it from non-display inputs. It uniquely specifies the action (swipe) and the target (touchscreen display), making it distinct from siblings like mobile_input_tap and mobile_input_drag.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mobile_input_drag. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it. The agent would have to infer context from the tool name and sibling list.

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