proxy_mobile_detect_iface

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

Description discloses return behavior (null+list if none found) but no annotations exist. Could mention whether detection is instantaneous or blocking, though probably safe.

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?

Single sentence with all key info: action, mechanism, return format. No wasted 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 zero-param detection tool, description covers purpose and output. Could mention typical use case (mobile proxy setup) but not strictly necessary.

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?

No parameters, so description needs no param details. Schema coverage is 100% (zero params), baseline 4 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?

Description clearly states the tool auto-detects the USB-NCM interface, a specific action. It's a verb+resource pair, and distinct from sibling tools which are mostly unrelated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or context (e.g., before proxy_mobile_setup). Agent lacks decision help.

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