adb_orientation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It informs about the two actions (get/set) and possible orientations but omits side effects, permission requirements, transient vs permanent changes, or error behavior. This leaves significant uncertainty for an agent.

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?

A single sentence of 23 words that front-loads the core purpose and lists all key variations. Every phrase is informative, with no redundancy or filler.

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 two actions and multiple orientation options, the description covers the core functionality. However, it lacks return value details for 'get' (e.g., format of orientation read) and does not mention expected device state (e.g., screen on). Given no output schema, this is a notable gap.

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% with descriptions for all three parameters (action, orientation, device). The description restates the enum values but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. It meets the baseline without adding extra value.

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 'Get or set screen orientation' with specific options (portrait, landscape, reverse portrait, reverse landscape, auto-rotate). This verb+resource pair is precise and distinguishes the tool from siblings like adb_screen or adb_screen_state which handle other screen aspects.

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 alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate. Given the extensive sibling list, explicit usage context is missing.

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