revoke_permission

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 a critical behavioral trait: revoking some permissions kills the app process. It also explains the effect on the permission dialog. It does not mention prerequisites like ADB connection or root permissions, but the given info is valuable and actionable.

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 plus a note, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value: action+technical details, use case+pairing, and a behavioral caveat. No wasted 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?

Given 3 fully described parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and a key side effect. It lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., device must be debuggable, ADB authorization) and does not specify Android version compatibility. However, for a focused permission tool, it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 100% for all three parameters, so baseline 3 applies. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema; it references 'runtime permission' but does not elaborate on parameter constraints or examples. No improvement over 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 tool revokes a runtime permission using 'pm revoke' and specifies the exact use case: testing the denied path or re-triggering the permission dialog. It explicitly pairs with the sibling 'grant_permission', distinguishing itself.

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?

Provides clear context: use when you need to test denied paths or re-trigger permission requests. Mentions pairing with grant_permission, implying sequential usage. Warns about process kills. Does not explicitly say when NOT to use or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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