adb_execute_shell

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key behavior: commands are restricted by a whitelist ('a través de una lista blanca de comandos'). However, it does not specify which commands are allowed, how invalid commands are handled, or what output/return behavior to expect.

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 a single clear sentence that front-loads the action and object before the whitelist detail. It contains no filler or redundant phrases beyond the whitelist mention, making it appropriately concise.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must supply critical context. It does not enumerate the whitelisted commands, describe the expected output, or explain error behavior. Without knowing what commands are permitted, an agent may struggle to construct a valid invocation.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage of the only parameter: command is described as the shell command to execute, with only permitted commands allowed. The description adds little beyond restating the whitelist concept, so it remains at the schema-dominated baseline.

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 and resource: it executes an Android shell command, and the whitelist qualifier adds precision. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like adb_get_logcat, adb_clear_logcat, adb_dump_hierarchy, and adb_list_packages, which target different concerns.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'comando shell' — the agent can infer this tool is for running shell commands rather than logcat, hierarchy, or package operations. However, the description does not explicitly mention alternatives, exclusions, or when to prefer a sibling tool, so guidance remains implicit rather than direct.

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