phone

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the returned facets (link type, model, screen, foreground app), which implies a non-mutating read. It says nothing about permissions, whether a paired device is required, or what happens when no phone is connected.

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 compact sentence with the most important fact (connection state) front-loaded. It is efficient, though it reads as a noun-phrase fragment rather than a complete statement of purpose.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description sensibly enumerates the data it returns, which is the main thing an agent needs. It falls short only on the missing preconditions for the query (device pairing, availability).

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly adds no parameter discussion, and there is nothing for it to clarify.

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 names the resource (phone link) and enumerates exactly what it reports: connection state over USB or Wi-Fi, model, screen, and foreground app. That is clear enough to distinguish it from generic siblings like info or checkup, but it never states an explicit verb and makes no direct sibling comparison.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. that a phone must be paired), and no named alternative among the ten siblings. The agent must infer from the word 'État' that this is a status query rather than an action.

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