mode_set

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state that the tool switches the active mode and enumerates the modes, but it does not explain downstream effects (e.g., future calls executing under the new mode), return behavior, or failure cases. Adequate for a simple switch, but with gaps.

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 concise sentence with the core action front-loaded. The 'Multi-Mode Engine' prefix is mild filler, but it does not significantly obscure the purpose.

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 is callable from the provided information: required mode is clear, valid values are listed, and reason is optional. Missing context includes no return/output details and no explicit statement of the stateful effect on subsequent tool operations, but these are non-blocking for such a simple mode switch.

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 coverage is 100%, so both mode and reason are already documented. The description adds value by enumerating the valid mode values (CHAT, OBSERVE, PLAN, etc.), which the schema's generic 'Target operating mode' does not provide.

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 states a specific verb ('Switches') and resource ('active operating mode'), and lists all valid target modes. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling mode_get, which reads the current mode rather than changing it.

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 intended use is clear: call this tool when the active operating mode needs to be changed. However, it does not explicitly mention mode_get as the alternative for reading the current mode, nor does it state conditions where switching should be avoided.

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