adb_test_gen_from_intents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates the tool analyzes and generates a workflow, but it ambiguously states 'launches each exported activity' which could imply execution rather than generation. It does not specify side effects, permissions, or requirements like package installation.

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 concise with two sentences that effectively communicate the tool's purpose and output. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the tool's core function and output format, referencing the compatible sibling adb_workflow_run. It could mention device connectivity requirements but is otherwise complete for a 2-parameter tool with no output schema.

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%, providing basic descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, such as value formats or constraints, justifying a baseline score of 3.

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 analyzes a package's activities and intent filters to generate a test workflow that launches exported activities and verifies rendering. It specifies the output format as workflow JSON compatible with adb_workflow_run, distinguishing it from similar tools like adb_test_gen_from_ui.

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 implies usage for generating intent-based test workflows but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like adb_test_gen_from_ui or adb_workflow_run. No guidance on prerequisites or contraindications is provided.

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