adb_at_probe

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

The description implies a diagnostic (read) operation by listing information collected, but with no annotations, it does not fully disclose potential side effects or behaviors like whether root is mandatory or if any state changes occur. The mention of root is helpful but not comprehensive.

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?

Single sentence front-loaded with the action and a clear list of probed items. No wasted words, highly efficient.

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?

The description lists the components of the probe but does not specify the output format or structure. Since there is no output schema, more detail on return type would improve completeness.

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%, so parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's descriptions, so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 runs a standard AT diagnostic probe and lists the specific items probed: modem identification, signal quality, network registration, SIM status, and supported bands. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'adb_at_send' which sends arbitrary commands.

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 indicates a prerequisite ('Requires root') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'adb_signal_detail' or 'adb_baseband_info'. It implies usage for comprehensive modem diagnostics without providing when-not-to-use guidance.

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