adb_launch_app

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, and it does add value: default activity is launched if activity is omitted, and device selection defaults when only one device is connected. However, it does not disclose behavior with multiple connected devices, what happens if the package is missing, or how errors are surfaced.

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 main behavior is stated in the opening sentence, followed by a short fallback clarification and a clean Args block. Every sentence adds useful information and the length is appropriate for a simple launch tool.

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 definition is largely complete: all parameters, optional defaults, and the fallback launch behavior are described, and an output schema exists so return values do not need explanation. Minor gaps remain around error handling when the app/package is absent and the exact consequence of multiple connected devices without a specified serial.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining all three parameters with examples, optionality, and defaulting behavior. Each argument's purpose and format are covered in plain language.

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 and resource: 'Launch an app on the Android device.' It also clarifies the default behavior when no activity is given, and the adb_ prefix plus Android mention distinguishes it from siblings like launch_app and sim_launch.

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 clear invocation context (Android device, optional device serial, activity fallback) but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives such as launch_app, sim_launch, or adb_install. No alternative or exclusion is mentioned, so the guidance is implied rather than direct.

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