android_install_apk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Install' which implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral aspects: whether this requires device permissions, if it's destructive to existing apps, what happens on failure, or any rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with this level of complexity and is perfectly front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't cover what happens after installation (success/failure indicators), doesn't mention dependencies like ADB availability, and provides minimal context about the three parameters. Given the complexity of device operations, more completeness is needed.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters documented), so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'APK file' which aligns with the 'apkPath' parameter, but adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides for any parameters. It doesn't explain the significance of device serial numbers or option behaviors.

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 action ('Install') and target ('APK file to an Android device or emulator'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'native_run_install_app' or 'flutter_run', which might have overlapping functionality in mobile app deployment contexts.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'native_run_install_app' and 'flutter_run' that might handle app installation in different ways, there's no indication of prerequisites, target scenarios, or exclusions for this Android-specific APK installer.

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