launch_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Launch an Android app' but does not describe side effects, failure conditions (e.g., app not installed), whether an existing task is resumed, or what the tool returns. This is a minimal statement of the operation, not a disclosure of behavior.

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 with no filler or redundant wording. Every word contributes to the core purpose and parameter usage, making it efficiently scannable for an agent.

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 the schema covers all parameters, but there are no annotations and no output schema. The description does not mention return behavior, error cases, or any side effects of launching an app, so it is minimally adequate but not fully complete for an agent that needs to predict the tool's full effect.

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 has 100% descriptive coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter, including the default launcher activity behavior. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond restating that an activity may optionally be specified, which keeps this at the baseline of 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 states a specific verb ('Launch') and resource ('Android app') and includes the key parameters (package name, optional activity). It clearly distinguishes launch_app from siblings like install_apk, uninstall_app, and force_stop by naming the core operation directly.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The intended usage is only implied by the tool's name and the nature of the operation, not explicitly stated.

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