adb_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states that it 'Returns a formatted table of connected devices', which gives a sense of the output. However, it doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., adb server running), potential side effects (unlikely), or error conditions. The description is adequate but minimal for a read-only listing tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a usage hint. Every sentence earns its place; no wasted words.

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 simplicity (no parameters, output schema available), the description covers the essential information: what it lists and why to use it. It lacks explicit prerequisites or notes about the adb environment, but these are likely implied by the sibling tools. The description is adequate for the agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 tool has no parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output format, which is useful even though there are no inputs.

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 action ('List all connected Android devices') with a clear resource and details (model, Android version, screen size). It's distinguishable from sibling tools like adb_device_info, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives. The verb 'list' is specific and the scope 'all connected' is clear.

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 a concrete use case ('Use this to find device serial numbers for targeting specific devices'), which tells the agent when to invoke it. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is clear.

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