appium_get_text

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

With readOnlyHint=true in annotations, the safety profile is already known. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation - it doesn't explain return format, behavior on missing elements, or whether hidden text is included. Since the description adds nothing beyond the structured fields, it falls short of the baseline.

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 wasted words. It is efficient and front-loads the core action, though it could be expanded with useful context without becoming verbose.

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 getter with two parameters and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema, it fails to mention the return type (string) or any edge-case behavior, and it doesn't differentiate from get_element_attribute, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding how to use it correctly.

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 100%, with both sessionId and elementUUID documented. The description itself doesn't add parameter-level meaning, but the schema already explains that elementUUID comes from appium_find_element. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 'Get text from an element' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool retrieves the text content of a UI element. It is distinguishable from siblings like appium_get_element_attribute and appium_get_active_element, though it doesn't explicitly state those distinctions.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as appium_get_element_attribute. The only implied usage is through the elementUUID parameter description referencing appium_find_element, but the tool description itself lacks any when-to-use or exclusion context.

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