adb_file_copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses pre-flight source size vs destination space check and post-verification by comparing file sizes. It also mentions the root flag for protected paths. These are helpful behavioral details beyond the basic copy operation.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second adds behavioral details, third gives a usage hint. Perfectly sized 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?

No output schema, but the tool is straightforward (file copy). The description covers purpose, key behaviors, and one flag. It could mention overwrite behavior or return value, but for a simple operation this is reasonably complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds only that the -r flag is for recursive directory copies, which is already evident from the schema description. No additional semantics beyond the schema.

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 the resource 'file or directory on the device'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like adb_file_move (which moves rather than copies) and adb_push/pull (which transfer between device and host). It is specific and unambiguous.

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 some usage context (pre-flight space check, post-verification, -r flag for recursion), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like adb_file_move, adb_push, or adb_pull. No guidance on when not to use it.

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