adb_wait_stable

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains polling behavior (waits until consecutive dumps are identical in element count and structure), which is transparent. However, it lacks details on timeout behavior or error handling, which would enhance transparency.

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 (three sentences) with the main purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: purpose, mechanism, and usage advice. No wasted 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?

The description covers purpose, mechanism, and usage context adequately for a wait tool. It lacks explicit handling of timeout/error states, but the timeoutMs parameter implies the behavior. Given no output schema and four parameters, it is reasonably complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds only marginal value by linking stableCount to the concept of 'consecutive identical dumps', which is already in the schema. Other parameters like timeoutMs and pollMs are not elaborated beyond their schema descriptions.

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's verb ('Wait'), resource ('UI stability'), and method (polls UI hierarchy, compares consecutive dumps). It distinguishes itself from siblings like adb_ui_dump or adb_wait_element by focusing on stabilization rather than specific element detection.

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 context for when to use ('after screen transitions, animations, or content loading before interacting with elements'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings, leaving some ambiguity.

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