adb_file_stat

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

Description states read-only operation and lists metadata fields, but does not disclose behavior regarding symlinks, special files, required permissions, or error handling. Without annotations, the description carries the burden and is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 that front-loads the core purpose ('Get detailed file metadata') and efficiently lists attributes. No wasted words.

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?

Description provides a good summary of returned metadata fields, compensating for the lack of output schema. However, it omits details on output format and does not differentiate from closely related siblings (e.g., adb_file_fsinfo), slightly reducing 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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides for path, root, and device. Baseline 3 applies as schema is sufficient.

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 retrieves detailed file metadata, listing specific attributes (size, permissions, ownership, timestamps, SELinux context, file type) and explicitly notes it is read-only. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like adb_ls (directory listing) and adb_file_checksum (checksum) by specifying the exact metadata returned.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative file-related tools (e.g., adb_file_fsinfo, adb_ls). The description does not provide context for selection, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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