adb_pair

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the action 'Pair with a device' but does not disclose side effects, outcomes, timeouts, or state changes (e.g., whether the pairing is persistent, what happens on failure). For a tool without annotations, more behavioral detail is needed.

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 a single sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and required context. It is efficient and front-loaded.

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 description covers what to provide (host, code) but does not explain the output or behavior after pairing (e.g., how to verify success, error messages). For a tool with 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 both parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema—'host' is described as 'IP and pairing port' and 'code' as '6-digit pairing code', which the schema already states. No additional parameter semantics or usage patterns are provided.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: to pair with a device over WiFi using a specific pairing code. It specifies the exact source of the code (Developer Options → Wireless debugging), making it distinct from other tools like adb_connect.

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 states clearly when to use this tool (when you have a pairing code from wireless debugging). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like adb_connect or specify when not to use it.

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