adb_workflow_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses supported actions and that the tool executes operations on the device, but does not mention error handling, side effects, or return behavior. It is adequate but not fully detailed.

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, consisting of two well-structured sentences. It front-loads the main purpose and lists actions, then explains how to provide the workflow. 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?

The tool has four parameters, one required, and no output schema. The description covers the core function but does not explain return values, failure modes, or prerequisites (e.g., device connection). Given the complexity of workflow execution, more context would be beneficial.

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%, and the description adds minimal extra context beyond the schema (e.g., repeating input formats). Since the schema already documents all parameters, the baseline is 3; the description does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 verb 'execute' and the resource 'workflow', and explains that it is a JSON-defined sequence with variable substitution, conditional steps, and loop support. It lists supported actions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like adb_workflow_list and adb_workflow_validate.

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 explains how to provide the workflow ('Pass the workflow as a JSON string or provide a saved workflow name'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives. Given the sibling tools, it could be clearer, but it's still well implied.

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