mobile_install_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly signals a non-mutating query operation and states the return shape ('JSON envelope describing the install'). It does not detail polling semantics or error behavior for unknown install IDs, but for a status query this is reasonably transparent.

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 concise and well-organized into Args and Returns sections. Every sentence contributes meaningful guidance, and there is no filler or repetition of schema titles.

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 simple two-parameter status query with an output schema available, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, how the parameters relate to sibling tools, and what kind of response to expect, leaving no critical gap for an agent trying to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It does so fully by explaining that serialno comes from list_devices and install_id comes from mobile_install_app, giving an agent precise information about how to obtain the values.

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 uses a specific verb ('Query') and a clear resource ('background install task started by mobile_install_app'), immediately distinguishing this status-retrieval tool from the related mobile_install_app sibling. The purpose is unambiguous and an agent can tell what this tool does without inspecting the schema.

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 states that the task must have been started by mobile_install_app and gives the exact provenance of both arguments: serialno from list_devices and install_id from mobile_install_app. It does not explicitly say 'use only after mobile_install_app' or list when not to use it, but the usage context is clearly implied.

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