devices

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure; it adds a concrete 90s timeout, which is useful. The read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'List', and no side effects, permission, or failure-mode details are stated.

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 purpose, followed by a usage hint and a timeout warning. Every sentence carries distinct information and there is no 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?

For a list-style tool with a full output schema and 100% parameter documentation, the description covers the core use case, cross-command selector guidance, and a key operational constraint. It is not exhaustive about alternatives, but nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke this 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that platform, device, udid, and serial are meant to target one result on later commands, giving workflow meaning to those parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List available devices and simulators' for automation selection. It clearly conveys what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly name a sibling tool to distinguish itself from.

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 gives clear usage context: this is the discovery step before targeting a device, and it tells the agent to use platform, device, udid, or serial on subsequent commands. It stops short of naming alternative tools or explicit when-not-to-use conditions.

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