devices

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state prerequisites (e.g., daemon connectivity), behavior when no devices exist, or that no state is modified. Acceptable but minimal for a simple list command.

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, exactly the necessary information. Front-loaded with the action verb and resource, with no redundant or vague filler.

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 output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description provides enough context for the tool's role in device selection, though it does not discuss operational prerequisites or alternatives. Good overall completeness for a list command.

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 the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds value by clarifying that platform, device, udid, and serial are selectors for later commands, but most params are left to the schema. Meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 lists available devices and simulators for automation selection. The verb 'List' is specific and the resource is well-defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'capabilities' or 'get'.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use platform, device, udid, or serial inputs on later commands to target a result, giving clear usage context. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for a discovery command.

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