adb_network_scan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses probing specific ports and using ARP table or custom IP range, but does not describe the output format, potential side effects (e.g., network noise), or whether scanning requires special permissions. The behavioral traits are partially covered but insufficient for a tool with no output schema.

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, each adding unique value: first states purpose, second details scan scope, third suggests next step. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides a solid overview but misses details like result format (e.g., list of IP addresses), potential time delays, or warning about network scanning behavior. It adequately covers purpose and parameters but leaves behavioral and output gaps.

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% (all parameters have descriptions). The description adds a minor note about default ports (5555-5558) but contradicts the schema's default list which includes 5554. The description does not clarify the purpose of the 'device' parameter for subnet determination beyond what the schema says.

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 tool scans the local network for Android devices with ADB enabled over WiFi/TCP, specifically probing common ADB ports on ARP table hosts and optionally a custom IP range. It directly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like adb_connect by noting that discovered devices can be connected with that tool.

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 (to find ADB-enabled devices on the local network) and indirectly suggests an alternative (adb_connect) for connection. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance or comparison to other network-related siblings like adb_network or adb_network_auto_connect.

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