adb_profile_detect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the captured information (hardware, chipset, modem, root status) and the matching process, but does not mention side effects, prerequisites (like device connected), or failure modes.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Auto-detect and build a device profile') and efficiently covers key captured data.

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 lacks details about the output format or return value. Since there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns. Also, no mention of error handling or edge cases.

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?

Both parameters are documented in the schema with descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not add beyond the schema; it only implies device detection without parameter specifics.

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 it auto-detects and builds a device profile, listing specific captured attributes (hardware, chipset, modem, root status) and mentions matching against a built-in profile library. This distinguishes it from siblings like adb_profile_save or adb_profile_list.

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 gives a clear use case: to obtain a device profile with hardware info and quirks. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other info-gathering tools like adb_device_info or state 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.