android_launch_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it discloses almost no behavior. It does not say what happens if the package is not installed, whether the call blocks until the app is foregrounded, whether it requires the device to be connected, or what an error looks like. For a device-mutating action tool this is a significant gap.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and the required argument, and the inline example earns its place by demonstrating the package-name format. No filler.

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?

For a simple one-parameter action with no output schema this is adequate but thin. Because there are no annotations to cover the safety and side-effect profile, the description should say at least whether the device must be connected and how failure (app not installed) is surfaced.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and a single parameter, the schema already does the documenting, so a 3 is the baseline. The description adds only the reverse-DNS example 'com.android.settings', which hints at the expected format but is marginal value.

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?

States a specific verb ('Launch') plus resource ('Android app') and the identifier it operates on ('package name'), which is enough to distinguish it from android_stop_app and android_list_apps at a glance. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or contrasting behaviors, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as android_list_apps (to discover a package name) or android_check_connection (to verify a device is reachable first). Usage is only implied by the verb itself, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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