avd_snapshot

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 reveals that operations are run via 'adb emu avd snapshot', which implies device-specific behavior. It explains the purpose of snapshots ('deterministically reset the device') and notes the emulator-only constraint. A minor gap: it doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., data loss on delete) or permission requirements.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence defines the tool and its actions, the second provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place.

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 moderate complexity (3 params, 4 actions), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, usage scenarios, and device constraints. Lacking: mention of return values (e.g., list returns a list of snapshots) or error cases (e.g., what happens if name doesn't exist on load). The absence of an output schema makes this a small gap.

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%, meaning the schema already documents all parameters. However, the description adds substantial value by clarifying the action list, explaining that 'name is required for save/load/delete; ignored for list', and noting the serial is optional when only one device is attached. This enhances understanding beyond the raw schema.

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 'Manage' and the resource 'emulator AVD snapshots', and specifies the exact actions (save, load, delete, list) with concrete examples like saving a known-good state and resetting the device. It distinguishes itself from siblings like boot_emulator and shutdown_emulator by focusing on snapshot operations rather than device lifecycle.

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 usage context: 'Save a known-good state, then load it to reset the device deterministically between runs' and highlights when this is better than alternatives ('faster than a wipe_data cold boot'). It also notes 'Emulator-only', implying it's not for physical devices. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for related tasks.

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