gesture

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the gesture performs touch input, its effect on the device, error handling, or any side effects. The agent cannot anticipate the tool's impact beyond execution.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, but it is too brief to be informative. While concise, it sacrifices clarity and fails to earn its place by adding meaningful guidance. A slightly longer description would improve utility without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

With 33 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the result of the gesture, how complex parameters interact (e.g., delta, origin, degrees), or error conditions. The agent has insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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 description adds no value beyond what the schema already provides. The schema documents all 33 parameters, including required 'kind' and nested 'delta' and 'origin' objects. The description does not elaborate on parameter meanings or usage, meeting the baseline.

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 states 'Run a structured gesture,' which gives a general verb and object but lacks specificity. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like swipe, scroll, or longpress, nor does it list the gesture types (e.g., pan, fling, pinch) that are evident only in the schema. The purpose is minimally clear but not distinctive.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools covering specific gestures (swipe, scroll, longpress), the absence of context on selection criteria forces the agent to infer from the schema alone. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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