act_on_ui

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explains only that set writes AXValue and AXPress activates controls, but says nothing about permissions, side effects, reversibility, or what happens with the other action values.

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 short and front-loaded, with the resource context first and action semantics second. It is efficient, though its terseness contributes to the missing behavioral and parameter detail.

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?

The tool has three parameters, a seven-value action enum, no annotations, and no output schema. The description is far too thin for that complexity, covering only two actions and giving no guidance on path/value requirements.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It clarifies only two of the seven action enum values, set and AXPress, and leaves path, value, select, focus, AXConfirm, AXIncrement, and AXDecrement unexplained.

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 names a specific resource, a native simulator element, and ties the action to a freshly inspected element. It is clear what the tool operates on, though it does not explicitly name inspect_ui or distinguish itself from coordinate-based siblings like tap_screen.

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?

"Freshly inspected" implies this should be used after inspect_ui, giving useful workflow context. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over tap_screen, press_button, or other interaction tools, nor when not to use it.

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