android_uiautomator_double_click

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 mentions the action (double click) but lacks critical behavioral details: whether this requires prior UI element interaction, what happens on failure (e.g., if element not found), if it blocks until completion, or error conditions. For a UI automation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity of UI automation, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It misses behavioral context (e.g., success/failure states, dependencies), usage prerequisites, and error handling, which are crucial for effective tool invocation in this domain.

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%, so the schema fully documents both parameters (resourceId and deviceSerial). The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying resourceId targets a UI element, which is already clear from the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Perform a double click') and target ('on a UI element by resource ID'), which is specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like android_uiautomator_click (single click) and android_uiautomator_long_click, but does not explicitly mention these alternatives in the description 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like android_uiautomator_click or android_touch, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an active Android session or UI element visibility). It only states what the tool does, not when to apply it.

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