boot

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It adds meaningful selection semantics (device is chosen via input selectors, not named here), but it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites, behavior when the device is already booted, or potential wait times. Some behavioral context is provided but significant gaps remain.

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, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or filler content.

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?

Despite 24 parameters, the output schema exists and every parameter has a description, so the description does not need to document parameters. It provides the essential orientation (what the tool does, how device selection works, and its preparatory role). Some operational details like headless behavior and failure modes are absent, but the core context is adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description enhances this by clarifying that the many selector parameters (udid, serial, device, platform, etc.) collectively choose the target rather than the command naming a device directly. This helps the agent interpret the parameter group, though no specific parameter syntax is added.

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 identifies the verb ('Boot or prepare') and the resource ('selected device or simulator'), which distinguishes this tool from lifecycle siblings like shutdown and devices. The phrase 'so later commands can target it' reinforces the tool's role in device preparation.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool ('before later commands'), implying a sequence. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the intended use case is reasonably unambiguous.

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