device_list

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it returns a merged list, gracefully handles missing adb, and clarifies Android is detection-only. This covers key behavioral traits without contradiction.

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 wasted words. Information is front-loaded with the main purpose, then caveats and limitations are added efficiently.

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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns (iOS and Android fields) and important caveats (adb handling, Android automation limitation). No further information is needed for correct 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?

The tool has no parameters, so description does not need to add param meaning. Baseline 4 applies as schema coverage is 100% and no param details are required.

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 returns a merged inventory of iOS simulators and Android devices, specifying included fields (udid, name, state, runtime) and handling of missing adb. This distinct purpose differentiates it from sibling tools which are automation actions.

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 advises when to use (to list devices) and notes that Android entries are detection-only and not usable with podium's automation tools, providing context for Android limitations. It lacks explicit mention of alternatives for Android automation but is otherwise clear.

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