physical_device_console

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It says 'stream its console output for N seconds' but does not disclose whether the call is synchronous or asynchronous, what the response contains, if the app is killed after streaming, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that involves streaming output.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 14 words. It efficiently communicates the action and the adjustable parameter (N seconds) with no wasted text.

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 tool has 3 parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain the return value or behavior of the stream (e.g., whether output is returned as a string, file, or live feed). Additionally, prerequisites like device connectivity or boot state are omitted. The response format is a critical missing piece.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter (deviceId, bundleId, timeout) already well-documented. The description adds 'N seconds' which aligns with timeout but adds no new semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Launch' and 'stream' applied to the resource 'app on a physical device' and 'console output'. It differentiates from siblings like physical_device_launch (launch only) and log_stream (logs without launching) by specifying the combined action.

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 usage for launching an app and getting its console output, which is a distinct use case. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like log_stream or physical_device_launch, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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