Create AVD

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the primary mutation (creating an AVD) and the fallback behavior of listing installed images when systemImage is omitted. It does not note prerequisites, error conditions, or side effects, leaving some behavioral gaps typical of a create tool.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds value. The example and fallback note are placed efficiently without any redundancy.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main purpose, an example, and a key fallback path. It does not explain return values or the full interaction flow when systemImage is omitted, but this is not critical for a create operation.

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%, but the description adds value beyond the schema: it provides a concrete example for systemImage ('system-images;android-35;google_apis;arm64-v8a') and explains the special behavior when systemImage is omitted, enhancing the schema's basic property descriptions.

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's purpose with a specific verb+resource ('Create an AVD') and provides a concrete example of the system image format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_avds, boot_emulator, and delete_avd.

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 clearly explains that systemImage can be omitted to list available images, giving practical usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus related tools like list_avds or boot_emulator, so it lacks explicit alternatives.

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