Double Tap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral transparency. It describes the action as performing a double tap, which implies standard behavior, but lacks details on consequences (e.g., whether it triggers app actions, if it requires screen readiness). This is adequate but minimal.

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 sentences long, efficient, and directly informative. Every sentence adds value: first sentence states the operation and parameters, second gives use cases. No unnecessary words.

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 simplicity (no output schema, straightforward parameters), the description is mostly complete. However, it does not mention coordinate handling for different screen orientations or the expected effect on the UI, which could be helpful for an agent.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema field descriptions. The description does not elaborate on coordinate system or units (e.g., pixels, device-specific scaling). Thus, the parameter semantics score is baseline 3.

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 action ('double tap') and the resource ('screen coordinates'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'tap' and 'long_press' by specifying the double tap action. It also provides typical use cases (zooming, text selection), which helps the agent understand its purpose.

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 mentions it is useful for zooming and text selection, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Given the many sibling tools, explicit guidance on when to choose this over 'tap' or other gestures would improve the score.

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