list_adb_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only discovery operation ('list'), but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention prerequisites like ADB server running or permissions. The local-setup context adds some behavioral framing, but significant safety specifics remain undisclosed.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core function, and then adds a concise usage context. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 covers purpose and usage context well, and the output schema exists so return-value documentation is not needed. However, the unexplained parameter, lack of explicit read-only disclosure, and absent prerequisites (e.g., ADB setup) leave gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, the description makes no mention of the sole parameter 'device' – its meaning, format, or filtering behavior. An agent has no guidance on whether to supply it or what values to use.

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's purpose: listing phones reachable over ADB (cable or wireless debugging) from this machine. It also dissociates this from day-to-day network-based phone access, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_devices.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Only useful while setting a phone up locally.' It also gives a clear exclusion: day-to-day the phones are reached over the network, not ADB, implying an alternative sibling. This is strong guidance for an agent.

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