Install App [Pro]

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

The description mentions the Pro version tag, which indicates licensing requirements not covered by annotations (which are absent). It also states that the APK is pushed to the device, disclosing a multi-step behavior beyond the schema. For a tool with no annotations, this is fairly transparent.

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 three sentences. The first sentence gives the main purpose, the second adds a requirement (full path), and the third explains the process. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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 tool with 2 parameters, 100% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the key aspects: purpose, required parameter detail, and process steps. It is missing return value information (e.g., success/failure output), but the tool seems straightforward. Completeness is high given the context.

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 input schema already has 100% description coverage for both parameters, but the description adds value by explaining that 'apk_path' must be a full path to the APK file and that the APK will be pushed to the device. However, it doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already covers, so a score of 3 is appropriate per guidelines.

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 installs an Android app from an APK file, specifying that it requires the full path to the .apk file and will push the file to the device. This uniquely distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'launch_app' (which launches an installed app) and 'uninstall_app'.

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 explains that the APK will be pushed to the device, which implicitly guides the user that the file must be on the host machine. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, such as using 'launch_app' for apps already installed. Sibling names provide context but are not referenced.

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