adb_file_copy

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral traits. It discloses pre-flight size checks and post-verification of file sizes, which adds transparency. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior, error handling, or permission requirements.

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 three sentences, each adding distinct information: purpose, behavioral checks, and flag usage. No redundant words; well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers key aspects: basic operation, safety checks, and recursive behavior. It lacks details on error scenarios and return values, but overall it is adequate for an agent to use 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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining pre-flight and post-verification behaviors and the meaning of the -r flag for directories. This enrichment justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 verb 'Copy' and resource 'file or directory on the device.' It distinguishes from siblings like adb_file_move and adb_push/pull by focusing on device-internal copy, including pre-flight checks and post-verification details.

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 explains when to use the -r flag for directories but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus alternatives like adb_push or adb_file_move. Usage context is implied but lacks clear exclusions.

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