adb_network_device_ip

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behaviors. It states the tool retrieves a WiFi IP address, but doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., device must be connected via USB) or return format. Adequate for a simple read operation, but missing some context.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The purpose and use case are front-loaded. Every sentence provides value.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema). The description covers its primary function and a common scenario. Could optionally mention that it returns an IP address string, but not required given the conciseness.

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 has one parameter 'device' with description 'Device serial', giving 100% coverage. Description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable per baseline scoring guidelines.

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 'Get the WiFi IP address of a connected device' with specific verb and resource. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like adb_network, the purpose is unambiguous and narrow enough to avoid confusion.

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?

Provides a concrete use case: 'switching from USB to wireless debugging without needing to find the IP manually.' This guides the agent on when to use the tool. No explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the scope is sufficiently defined.

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