get_properties

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

Despite lacking annotations, the description clearly indicates a read-only operation via the verb 'retrieve'. It names the exact command (getprop) and the target (Android device), making the behavior transparent. It does not disclose potential nuances like the default device selection when serial is omitted, but that is a minor gap for a simple getter.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It is free of redundant wording and earns its place with no wasted text.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with a well-defined schema and no output schema required, the one-liner is adequate. It could have hinted at the optionality of the property name parameter or the output format, but the schema already covers those aspects, making the description sufficiently complete for this context.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (serial and propertyName), with 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 retrieves system property values (getprop) from an Android device. It is specific about the resource and action, and the parenthetical 'getprop' disambiguates it from other system information tools like get_dumpsys.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_dumpsys or execute_shell_command. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context without any exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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