get_main_activity_class

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

With no annotations, the description usefully discloses the key non-obvious behavior that Kotlin compiler metadata is stripped by default and that slim=False yields a raw dump. It does not explicitly state read-only safety or error behavior, but 'Fetch' strongly implies a read operation.

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?

Two efficient sentences: purpose first, then the important parameter behavior. No filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter getter with an output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter behavior adequately. It lacks explicit routing guidance versus sibling manifest tools, which is the main remaining gap.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining the sole parameter: slim defaults to true and strips Kotlin metadata, while slim=False returns a raw dump. The meaning is clear, though 'raw dump' remains slightly vague.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetch the main activity class from AndroidManifest.xml. This clearly distinguishes it from broader siblings like get_android_manifest and get_manifest_component by focusing on the main activity class specifically.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_android_manifest, get_manifest_component, or get_all_classes. The only conditional guidance concerns the slim parameter, not tool selection.

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