Run Android Lint

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool runs lint and returns a report summary; it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, whether it triggers a build, how long it may take, or what happens on failure. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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, compact sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the action ('Run Android Lint') and the output ('return the textual report summary'), and the 'lint<Variant>' notation is a dense but clear way to express the task naming.

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 is a relatively simple tool, and the description communicates the core purpose and output well. However, with no output schema or annotations, additional context about the report summary's content and any side effects would improve completeness. It is minimally viable as-is.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions and defaults, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, though 'lint<Variant>' hints that the variant parameter directly maps to the Gradle task name.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: running Android Lint and returning a textual report summary. It includes the Gradle task naming pattern 'lint<Variant>', which helps distinguish it from other build/test tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 like build_app, test_app, or other analysis tools. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred usage contexts, leaving the agent without selection criteria.

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