shake

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and excels. It explains platform-specific differences (iOS discrete shake vs. Android accelerometer bursts with orientation restore), how `count` affects sustained motion, the return value, and supported local/remote iOS simulators.

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 front-loaded with the action verb and resource, then efficiently covers usage, platform behavior, parameters, return value, and supported targets. Each sentence is informative and no words are wasted.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is comprehensive. It explains the gesture's purpose, platform-specific mechanics, `count` behavior, return value, and device compatibility, leaving no critical gap for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 has 100% coverage for both parameters. The description reinforces `count` semantics ('Set `count` above 1 when a detector needs sustained motion') and adds context for `udid` by specifying supported simulator types, adding value beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Shake the device (iOS simulator or Android emulator).' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like gesture-tap or gesture-swipe by focusing on the shake gesture and its use cases.

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 the tool ('Use to trigger anything bound to the shake gesture') and gives concrete examples (iOS undo/redo, React Native dev menu, shake-to-report). It also notes platform limitations ('Only phone/tablet simulators and emulators are supported'), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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