adb_file_checksum

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

The description explicitly labels the operation as 'Read-only operation,' which is a clear behavioral trait. It also mentions reporting file size alongside the hash. However, it does not disclose that the 'root' parameter can be used for protected paths, nor does it explain error behavior or permission requirements, but given no annotations, 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 three sentences long, each providing valuable information: the action, use cases, and output. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, though the second sentence could be seen as slightly verbose.

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?

While the description specifies the output (hash and file size), it lacks details on possible error conditions (e.g., file not found, permission denied) and the role of the 'device' and 'root' parameters. The tool has no output schema, so the description carries full burden for output, but it partially fulfills it.

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 all four parameters with concise descriptions (100% coverage). The description itself does not add new information about parameters beyond what is in the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool computes SHA-256 hash of a file on the device, with specific use cases for firmware integrity and tamper detection. However, it only mentions SHA-256, while the schema allows sha1 and md5, which could mislead an agent relying solely on the description.

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 relevant use cases (firmware integrity, tamper detection, file comparison) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling file tools like adb_file_stat or adb_file_fsinfo. No exclusion criteria or alternative suggestions are given.

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