adb_telephony

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only mentions what data is retrieved but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, required permissions, potential side effects, or data size. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 of 12 words, efficiently conveying the core purpose. No wasted words, though it may be too brief for completeness.

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?

Despite the tool's moderate complexity (gathering telephony state) and absence of an output schema, the description only lists three vague output categories. It does not explain the structure, specific fields, or provide enough context for the agent to distinguish from similar tools.

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 a single optional 'device' parameter described as 'Device serial'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, such as its optionality, default behavior when omitted, or impact on output.

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 gets telephony state and lists three specific aspects: cell info, signal strength, network registration. It is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like adb_cell_identity or adb_signal_detail which may have overlapping functionality.

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. With many related sibling tools (e.g., adb_cell_identity, adb_signal_detail, adb_neighboring_cells), the agent lacks context to choose correctly.

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