perform_gesture

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals the backend (uiautomator2) and the batching rationale, but says nothing about what happens on an invalid action string, whether gestures block until completion, or what the response contains beyond the mere existence of an output schema. For a device-mutating input-driving tool with zero annotation coverage, this is thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its terseness comes at the cost of the missing parameter and behavior detail noted elsewhere.

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 output schema relieves it of explaining return values, but for a 5-parameter tool with 0% schema description coverage and no annotations, the description should define the action vocabulary, the points coordinate format, and the meaning of percent/duration/selector. None of that is present, leaving an agent to guess at call shape.

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% across 5 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It hints that 'points' is the swipe path and that 'action' values include pinch_in/pinch_out, but leaves 'percent', 'duration', and 'selector' entirely undefined, and never enumerates the full set of valid action strings for a free-form required string.

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 concrete verb (perform) and concrete gesture resources (multi-point swipe path, pinch_in/pinch_out), plus the backend (uiautomator2). This distinguishes it from the plain swipe path implied by the sibling swipe_screen, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 phrase 'avoiding repeated tap/swipe tool round trips' implies when to reach for this tool over single-action siblings, but it is indirect. There is no explicit 'use X instead when...' routing and no stated preconditions (e.g., screen must be idle, gesture must start from a valid UI state).

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