Uninstall App

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no mention of irreversibility, prerequisites (e.g., app must be installed), or potential failure modes. With no additional behavioral context, the description does not go beyond what annotations already convey.

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 concise sentence with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it immediately clear what the tool does.

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 simple two-parameter destructive operation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not mention what happens after uninstalling (e.g., success/failure response) or any caveats like whether the operation is reversible. Given the annotations cover destructiveness, the missing details are minor but still leave room for improvement.

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 input schema provides complete descriptions for both parameters (device and bundle_id), including how to find the device. Since schema_description_coverage is 100%, the description adds no extra parameter information. The baseline of 3 applies because 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 'Uninstall an app from mobile device' clearly identifies the specific action (uninstall) and resource (app on mobile device). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mobile_install_app and mobile_terminate_app, so an agent can easily tell what this does.

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 usage context is implied – you uninstall when you need to remove an app. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives to consider, such as mobile_terminate_app for stopping a running app. The schema's parameter hint about using mobile_list_available_devices is helpful but not usage guidance for this tool itself.

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