interceptor_android_setup

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses the core operations (push CA cert, ADB reverse tunnel). It does not cover side effects or prerequisites, but for a one-param tool, the key behavior is adequately described.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that front-load the purpose and include a comparison. Every sentence adds value without any unnecessary 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?

For a simple setup tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It explains the tool's scope, its relationship to the sibling tool, and the key difference (no Wi-Fi proxy).

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 100% with the single parameter 'serial' having a description 'ADB device serial'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action: 'push CA cert + ADB reverse tunnel only (no Wi-Fi proxy)'. It also explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tool interceptor_android_activate by stating it's equivalent to that tool with set_wifi_proxy=false.

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 direct usage hint: it's a 'Quick setup' for when Wi-Fi proxy is not needed. It references the alternative tool for the full setup, giving clear guidance on when to use this tool versus interceptor_android_activate.

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