run_maestro_flow

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior on its own, but it only says it 'runs' a flow. It does not reveal whether the flow is executed on the device, whether it is long-running, what side effects it may have, or what happens on failure. The description conveys only the core action without behavioral context.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy, and the main action is front-loaded. However, it is concise to the point of being thin, so it earns a strong but not top score.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, annotations, or parameter documentation, the description is not complete enough. It omits what the YAML should contain, which device is targeted, and what the agent should expect after invocation. An agent would need additional knowledge to call this tool confidently.

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 should compensate, but it only hints that flowYaml is YAML-based. It does not explain that flowYaml likely contains the full Maestro YAML content, what deviceId refers to, or what format or constraints the parameters have. The parameter meanings are mostly left to inference.

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 and resource: 'Run a complex Maestro flow via YAML.' It identifies the mechanism (YAML) and clearly points to a flow-level operation rather than a single gesture. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like device_tap or device_swipe, but the wording makes the distinction reasonably inferable.

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 such as tap_on_element, device_type, or manage_bundler. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions that would help an agent choose this over the many sibling tools.

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