adb_install

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 does disclose the -r flag (replacement behavior) and device auto-selection, which adds useful context. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., adb server running, device permissions) and failure modes, so it is not fully transparent.

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 concise sentences plus a clear argument list. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value—no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a simple two-parameter install tool, the description covers the action, parameter meanings, and key behavior. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Missing are prerequisites and error handling, but these are minor for a straightforward operation.

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 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining apk_path (absolute local path) and device (serial number, optional, auto-selection when only one device). This gives the agent complete semantic understanding beyond the raw schema.

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 tool's verb and resource: 'Install an APK file on the Android device.' This is specific and distinct from siblings like adb_push (file transfer) or sim_install (iOS simulator), so an agent can immediately identify the correct operation.

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 states the primary use case (installing an APK) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as adb_push or sim_install. There is no direct when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance, though the name and scope make it implicitly clear.

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