gesture

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden, but it only says 'Perform a structured gesture.' It does not disclose side effects, device interaction requirements, expected outcome, or any safety-relevant behavior such as whether the gesture triggers navigation or other UI state changes.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and enumeration of gesture kinds, then gives a compact usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

This tool has 39 parameters and 7 gesture kinds, making it highly complex, yet the description does not map which parameters apply to which gesture kind. There is no output schema or annotation to compensate, so an agent would struggle to select the correct subset of inputs for a particular gesture.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful cross-parameter guidance by stating that inputs are conditional on the chosen gesture kind ('provide only the inputs that apply to that kind'), which helps disambiguate the many optional 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 clearly states the tool performs a gesture and enumerates the supported variants: pan, fling, swipe, pinch, rotate, transform, and drag. This gives a specific verb and resource scope, distinguishing it from the sibling 'swipe' tool by covering the broader gesture family.

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 internal input-filtering guidance ('Select the gesture kind, then provide only the inputs that apply') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like swipe, drag, or scroll. It does not mention exclusions or when a sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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