decode_apk

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It mentions the tool uses APKTool but doesn't describe what 'decode' entails (e.g., extracts resources, decompiles code, creates output directories), potential side effects, permission requirements, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely performs file system operations.

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 at just 6 words, with zero wasted language. Every word contributes to the core purpose statement, making it efficiently front-loaded. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness for other dimensions.

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 a 4-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but with an output schema present, the description is inadequate. While the output schema might document return values, the description doesn't address the tool's behavior, parameter meanings, or usage context sufficiently for a decoding operation that likely has significant file system implications.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 4 parameters, the description provides no parameter information beyond what's implied by the tool name. It doesn't explain what 'apk_path' should contain, what 'force', 'no_res', or 'no_src' flags do, or how they affect the decoding process. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 action ('decode') and target resource ('an APK file using APKTool'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_manifest' or 'list_resources' that might also involve APK analysis, leaving room for ambiguity about when to choose this tool over others.

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. With siblings like 'get_manifest' or 'list_resources' that might provide specific APK information without full decoding, there's no indication of when full APK decoding is preferred over targeted extraction, nor any mention of prerequisites or constraints.

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