aua_long_press

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so mutability and non-idempotency are covered. 'No replay' and 'inspect uncertain results' add a modest verification warning, but nothing about failure behavior, blocking, or what an uncertain outcome looks like.

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?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the verb and targeting modes, then capability flags, then a caution. No wasted words.

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 9-parameter tool with zero schema description coverage, no output schema, and opaque nested objects (visual/LocateArgs, variation, observation_id), the description explains only the targeting modes and duration. An agent cannot infer what visual matching, variation, or observation_id do from this text.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage the description must carry the load, and it does cover the key semantic decision (selector versus x/y coordinates, mutually exclusive via 'OR') plus the duration range. It leaves visual, variation, observation_id, the observe enum values and all Selector fields entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Long press once by selector OR x/y display pixels', with a duration parameter. The 'once' phrasing implicitly separates it from aua_tap and aua_double_tap, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'Inspect uncertain results; no replay' gives post-call guidance, but the description never says when to choose a long press over aua_tap, aua_drag or aua_swipe, nor when selector-based targeting should be preferred over raw coordinates.

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