adb_device_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as a read-only snapshot with no side effects mentioned. However, it does not disclose potential performance considerations, required permissions, or any subtle behaviors beyond the stated purpose.

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 with two sentences that front-load the purpose and quickly add usage context. Every sentence is necessary and no words are wasted.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the returned components (battery, network, screen, activity, orientation). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool returns, though it could be more detailed about the format or possible values.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'device' (serial). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate but not improved upon.

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 provides a combined device state snapshot including battery, network, screen, activity, and orientation. This specific verb+resource definition distinguishes it from individual sibling tools like adb_battery, adb_network, and adb_current_activity.

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 suggests using it as a pre-check before UI automation or a quick health summary, but does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives. It provides context but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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