rotate

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the minimal action. Since no annotations are provided, the description should explain consequences (e.g., does it rotate the UI? is it reversible? required permissions?). This is a significant gap.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but lacks necessary detail for a tool with 18 parameters. It could be expanded to include key behavioral context without losing 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?

Given the complexity (18 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It omits return values, side effects, prerequisites, and error conditions. The tool needs substantial improvement.

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 94%, so the input schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the 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 'Rotate device orientation' clearly conveys the action and resource (rotate device orientation). It uses a specific verb and resource, and although it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'swipe' or 'scroll', the purpose is immediately understandable.

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. It lacks context such as prerequisites (e.g., device must be connected, application must be running) or when rotation is applicable.

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