adb_ui_find

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It states search returns coordinates (non-destructive), but does not mention performance, error handling (e.g., no match), or whether it waits for UI stability. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, front-loaded with core purpose. Each sentence serves a purpose: what it does and what it returns.

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 simple param set and no output schema, the description covers return value (coordinates) and purpose. It doesn't specify behavior on multiple matches or missing elements, but is largely complete for effective use.

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 descriptions are 100% covered and already include 'partial match' and 'case-insensitive' details. The description reinforces these but adds no new semantic value beyond schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches UI hierarchy for elements by text, resource-id, or content-description, and returns coordinates. This distinguishes it from siblings like adb_ui_dump (full dump) and adb_tap_element (direct tap).

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?

Mentions 'for precise adb_input targeting' implying a use case, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like adb_tap_element or adb_input. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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