connect_wireless

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the port changes and that the tool rediscovers it, a key operational detail. It doesn't mention failure handling or side effects, but the core reconnection behavior is transparent.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary purpose and usage trigger are front-loaded, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 description explains the use case and behavior, and an output schema exists. However, the missing parameter semantics is a significant gap for a tool with only one parameter. The description is adequate for understanding intent but incomplete for actual invocation.

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 schema has zero description coverage for the 'device' parameter, and the description does not mention it at all. An agent has no guidance on what value to supply (e.g., device ID, IP, name). The tool cannot be correctly invoked without this information.

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 connects to an already-paired phone over Wi-Fi, a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like pair_wireless (initial pairing) and enable_wireless (toggling wireless debugging) by its focus on reconnection after a reboot.

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?

Explicitly says to use after the phone reboots or wireless debugging is toggled, providing clear timing. It also implicitly excludes initial pairing scenarios, giving an agent unambiguous guidance on when to invoke this tool over alternatives.

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