enter_exhibition_mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it explains that power_on_all and set_power(turn_on=True) are refused, locomotives move forward only at fixed speed, address allowlist restrictions, and that lights and functions remain unrestricted. Also documents the deliberate asymmetry in requiring a password to exit.

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?

While lengthy, every sentence adds value. The description is well-structured with a clear opening, bullet points for restrictions, and logical flow. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently conveys complex behavior.

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?

Despite having 0 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fully self-contained. It covers activation, exact behavioral changes, what remains unaffected (lights), and exit strategy, leaving no gaps in understanding.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline score of 4 applies. The description does not need to add meaning to parameters since there are none.

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 tool's purpose: 'Turn ON exhibition mode: a restricted-safety mode for public demos'. It specifies the verb (turn on) and resource (exhibition mode), and effectively distinguishes it from its sibling exit_exhibition_mode by explaining the asymmetry in password requirements.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'for public demos (exhibitions, kids trying voice control)', 'whenever the layout is about to be unsupervised or handed to the general public'. Also mentions that no password is needed and that it can be freely called, and directs to exit_exhibition_mode for deactivation.

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