app_button

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses that pressing triggers actions including transmit, but does not fully detail side effects, error conditions, or permissions beyond 'YOUR OWN TARGETS ONLY.'

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 relatively brief with one main sentence plus a warning. It could be more structured (e.g., separating usage notes), but every part adds value.

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 tool's advanced and app-specific nature, the description provides basic context but lacks detail on return values (despite having an output schema not shown) and does not differentiate clearly from sibling tools like app_exit or press.

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 0% description coverage for parameters. The description explains args as 'the button name/index the running app expects,' adding meaning beyond the schema, but lacks examples or constraints (e.g., valid values).

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 tool presses a named in-app button over BLE, including the press-release sequence. It specifies app-specific context (universal IR/Sub-GHz) and warns it's only for own targets, distinguishing it from general press tools.

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 implies use when an app expects a button press and is advanced ('Advanced + app-specific'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives like press or press_sequence.

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