uninstall_package

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'uninstalls' without noting the destructive nature (permanent removal, data loss), potential permission requirements, or behavior for system packages. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the core action and then clarifying the parameter. There is no fluff, and it reads naturally.

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 one-parameter tool, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter. However, it omits any note about side effects, error conditions, or constraints (e.g., cannot uninstall system apps), which an agent would benefit from knowing. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 schema has only one parameter with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning by specifying that package_name is 'the name of the package to uninstall,' but it does not provide format details (e.g., fully qualified name) or how to obtain it. It is minimal but present.

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 clear verb and resource: uninstalls a package from a connected Android device. It is immediately distinct from sibling tools like install_apk or is_installed, so the agent knows exactly what action this tool performs.

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 provides clear context for the action (uninstalling a package) and implicitly differentiates from install_apk and is_installed. It does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the uniqueness of the action makes the usage obvious.

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