shell_exec

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavior. It warns about large outputs and mentions the command runs under the agent's UID (system_user). However, it does not explicitly state that shell commands can be destructive or that the tool may block, leaving gaps.

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 concise with two sentences and a warning. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides usage and cautions. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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?

The description includes key behavioral warnings (large outputs, UID) and usage context. However, it lacks information about error handling, timeouts, or potential destructive impact. Adequate but not complete for a shell execution tool.

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?

Only one parameter ('command') with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain the format, allowed commands, or constraints of the 'command' parameter beyond naming it. Examples are given but no direct parameter guidance.

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 'Execute a shell command on the device', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_activities or query_provider by targeting shell execution, a unique capability.

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?

It provides clear usage context: 'Useful for follow-up verification' and gives examples (read a file, check broadcast, dump logcat). It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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