get_current_activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, potential latency, or error conditions (e.g., device not found). The phrase 'currently displayed' implies real-time data but lacks detail on freshness or constraints.

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 front-loads the core purpose ('Get the currently displayed app and activity'), making it immediately actionable without unnecessary elaboration.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., app name, activity class, timestamp) or how to interpret results, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's full behavior and output.

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 input schema fully documents the optional 'device_id' parameter. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, but it doesn't need to compensate for gaps, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 ('Get') and the target ('currently displayed app and activity'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_device_info' or 'get_ui_tree', which might also provide related information about the device state.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_device_info' or 'get_ui_tree'. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., device connectivity) or typical use cases (e.g., debugging app interactions).

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