mobile_back

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the action and notes a JSON response, but does not disclose potential side effects such as leaving the current app, navigating between screens, or doing nothing when already at the root.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and organized into clear Args and Returns sections. Every line earns its place without fluff.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it does, the required argument's source, and the return type. However, it lacks usage context relative to sibling navigation tools and any behavioral caveats, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that serialno is the mobile device serialno and telling the agent where to obtain it ('from list_devices'), which adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare type and title.

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 ('Press the device back button') and identifies the target resource as a mobile device via the serialno parameter. It is concise and understandable, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool browser_go_back.

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 only usage guidance points to obtaining serialno from list_devices. There is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_go_back or mobile_home, nor any mention of when not to use it.

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