wake_screen

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

With no annotations, this description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the main side effect (waking and dismissing swipe lock) and the key limitation (secure locks require the user), providing useful context beyond the bare tool name.

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 short sentences contain the core action and the critical security caveat with no redundancy. The structure front-loads the behavior before the limitation.

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 is complete for a simple action and an output schema exists, but the undocumented device parameter is a real gap. An agent cannot be fully confident how to target the wake operation across the devices managed by the sibling tools.

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?

There is one parameter, device, and the schema provides only a type and default with no description. The tool description does not mention device at all, so the agent cannot tell whether it expects a device ID, serial, index, or what the empty default means.

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 identifies the specific action ('wake the phone') and a precise scope ('dismiss a simple swipe lock'), and it differentiates the tool from full unlock tools by stating that PIN, pattern, and fingerprint locks cannot be bypassed. This is enough for an agent to know what the tool does and what it does not do.

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 implies the tool is appropriate when the screen is off and protected only by a swipe lock, and it explicitly excludes secure lock types. However, it never names an alternative such as unlock_phone or states when to prefer that sibling, so routing guidance remains implicit.

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