get_screen_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'inferred' context and 'remediation guidance,' hinting at heuristic nature and purpose, but lacks details about potential limitations, performance impact, or what the context actually contains.

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 front-loaded sentences that deliver the purpose and usage condition without any filler or 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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description adequately states purpose and usage context. However, it could improve by explaining the parameter and the return value to make it self-contained.

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 description does not mention the 'sessionId' parameter at all, despite 0% schema description coverage. The agent learns nothing about its meaning, format, or expected values beyond the bare schema name and type.

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 gets 'inferred current Android screen context' for 'remediation guidance' and explicitly specifies usage context 'after testID lookup fails,' distinguishing it from sibling tools that also operate on screen context.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Use after testID lookup fails'), providing clear context and implying an alternative approach (testID lookup) without needing an explicit exclusion list.

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