adb_wait_element

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

The description discloses polling behavior and timeout, adding value beyond the schema. Without annotations, it carries the burden but omits details like what happens on timeout, performance impact, or required permissions.

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 three sentences: purpose, mechanism, and usage context. Front-loaded and concise with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the presence of siblings like adb_wait_stable, the description does not differentiate itself. It covers basic behavior but lacks specificity on return values or error states, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the tool's description does not elaborate beyond schema.

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 waits for a UI element to appear or disappear using polling. It uses specific verb 'wait' and resource 'UI element', but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like adb_wait_stable, which also involves waiting for UI state.

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 provides clear usage context: 'useful for waiting after navigation, animations, or async content loading.' However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or mention of alternative tools.

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