device_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. The verb 'Get' implies a non-mutating read and 'connected Android device' names a precondition, but the description does not disclose return contents, error behavior, or what happens when no device_id is provided. It is not misleading, but it is 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 a single sentence with no filler, and it front-loads the verb and object. It is appropriately compact for a one-parameter getter, though a brief clarification of what 'detailed information' includes would make it more useful while still remaining concise.

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 is simple and has one optional parameter, but there is no output schema and no annotations to describe the return contract. 'Detailed information' is too generic to tell an agent exactly what it will receive, and no caveats are mentioned beyond the device being connected. This is a minimum-viable definition with clear gaps.

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 device_id parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including fallback to the default device. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a concrete resource ('detailed information about a connected Android device'), with an explicit '(Android)' platform prefix. It is clearly distinguishable from the UI-action siblings, though it does not specify what 'detailed information' includes or explicitly contrast itself with list_devices/connect_device.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_devices, connect_device, or get_current_activity. It states only the operation, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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