adb_start_activity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action ('Start an activity') without revealing potential side effects, failure modes (e.g., activity not found), or device selection behavior when deviceId is omitted. No context on return values, blocking behavior, or permissions is given.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and is free of redundancy. Every word adds value and directly conveys the tool's purpose.

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 complexity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides only the bare minimum. It lacks usage guidance and behavioral context, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand how to invoke the tool and interpret outcomes, especially across the variety of sibling ADB tools.

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 already provides descriptions for both parameters (intent with an example and deviceId as optional). The phrase 'with the given intent' simply restates the intent parameter without adding meaningful new semantics. Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline score 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 'Start an activity with the given intent' clearly identifies the specific verb ('Start'), resource ('activity'), and scope ('given intent'). It is unambiguous and naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like adb_shell, adb_tap, or adb_force_stop, which perform different actions.

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, typical scenarios, or explicit exclusions (e.g., 'use adb_shell for background commands'). The agent is left to infer context solely from the name and schema.

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