List Remote Devices

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds value by disclosing the authentication prerequisite and the billing/limited-resource nature of remote reservations. It doesn't contradict annotations and provides context beyond them, though it omits details about the exact return format or pagination, which are less critical here.

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?

Three well-structured sentences: the core action is front-loaded, the sibling distinction is clear, and the prerequisite is stated last. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it lists, how it differs from the local alternative, and what must be done before calling it. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is effectively fully covered (vacuously). The description doesn't need to explain parameters since none exist, so the baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List the catalog of device models (make, platform, OS version) available to reserve from the remote cloud device fleet.' It clearly differentiates from mobile_list_available_devices by explaining the local vs remote distinction, leaving no ambiguity about which tool to pick.

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 explicitly contrasts with mobile_list_available_devices, explaining when each is appropriate, and states the prerequisite to call mobile_login_to_cloud_provider first, including a retry strategy on authentication errors. This is direct, actionable guidance.

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