list_inspectable_pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It conveys that the operation is a non-destructive enumeration and scopes to connected devices, but it does not disclose return format, behavior when no devices are connected, or whether a prior connection is required. Some behavioral context is added, but not comprehensive.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and object, making it immediately understandable.

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?

The tool is simple: one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations. The description states core purpose but omits what the enumeration returns (e.g., page titles, URLs) and when to use it in a workflow. Given the low complexity, the description is adequate but leaves these gaps.

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% for the only parameter (device_udid), and its description clearly states 'Filter to a specific device.' The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the schema does the heavy lifting, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 uses the specific verb 'enumerate' and identifies the resource as 'inspectable WKWebViews' across connected devices. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_devices, which lists devices, not webviews.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The intended use is implied: to obtain available webviews before inspecting a specific one. There is no direct alternative for this purpose, so context is mildly implicit.

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