android-diag

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 explains that output_path defaults to a temp file and is summarized, and mentions timeout defaults. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like performance impact or device lock requirements. It is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 well-structured with separate Args and Returns sections, and front-loads the purpose. It is detailed but not excessively verbose; every sentence adds value. Minor redundancy in separately explaining actions, but overall efficient.

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's complexity (7 params, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers all parameters, default behaviors, and return value. It omits prerequisites like device connectivity and error handling, but is reasonably complete for an AI 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning to all parameters: serial, action, output_path, include_screenshots, package_or_pid, native, and timeout_seconds. It explains defaults and behavior for optional paths. This compensates well for the schema's lack of 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 'Perform diagnostic operations like capturing bug reports or heap dumps.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on other aspects like app, device, file, log, screenshot, shell, and UI. This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention context such as troubleshooting device issues or any exclusions. The intended usage is only implied by the parameter descriptions, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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