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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable context by explaining that dev mode allows COMPLETE REPLACE (wipe data, keep credentials) and live protects it, which clarifies the destructive nature and its limits. This goes beyond the annotation flags.

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 concise sentences: the first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidance. The most important information (mode semantics) is front-loaded, and every sentence contributes value without 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 mode-setting tool with no output schema and two parameters, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the modes, and usage context. It does not mention return values or side effects beyond data handling, but given the simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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 has only an enum for 'mode' and a generic 'project_uuid'. The description explains the meaning of 'dev' and 'live' values, adding semantic depth beyond the enum names. project_uuid is self-evident. With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates well for the critical parameter.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'project's build mode', and explains the two modes 'dev' and 'live' with their distinct implications. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like build_deploy or build_replace_project by focusing on the mode configuration.

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 explicit guidance on when to use dev ('Switch to dev before replacing') and when to use live ('to live when it's in production'). It implies the tool is used when adjusting build mode, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context is clear.

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