physical_device_launch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Launch an installed app' but omits critical details: what happens if the device is disconnected, if the app is not installed, if the launch fails, whether the app is brought to foreground, or what the tool returns. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior and error states.

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 one short sentence of 9 words, which is very concise. It front-loads the core action. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity; a slightly longer description could add value without losing conciseness.

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 complexity (launching an app on a physical device), the description is incomplete. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., device must be connected and app installed), behavioral details (e.g., does it return success/error?), and any reference to output. Since no output schema is provided, the description should compensate but does not.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('App bundle identifier' and 'Device identifier'), so the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline is 3 for high coverage, and the description does not provide additional context like how to obtain these identifiers or format expectations, but does not detract.

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 the resource 'an installed app on a connected physical device', which is specific to physical devices. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'app_launch', which might serve a similar purpose on simulators or other contexts, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., device must be connected, app must be installed) or exclusions (e.g., do not use if the app is not installed). Sibling tools like 'app_launch' or 'physical_device_install' could be confused without context.

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