adb_input_fling

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'high-velocity' and 'short duration' but lacks specifics like whether the gesture is fire-and-forget or waits for completion, and does not detail effects like animation triggers or potential system impact.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence defines the action, and the second provides use context, effectively front-loading key information.

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 simplicity (6 parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral effect adequately. It could be improved by explicitly stating that fling is a type of swipe with constrained duration, but overall it is sufficient.

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 provides 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The tool description adds minimal additional meaning, only implying that coordinates define start/end and duration is short, which is already clear from schema defaults and range.

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 defines the tool as performing a 'high-velocity fling gesture', distinguishes it from swipe, and lists concrete use cases like fast-scrolling, dismissing notifications, and triggering velocity-sensitive behaviors.

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 tool (creating scroll momentum, fast-scrolling) and contrasts it with swipe, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for different scenarios.

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