monitor_operation_mode

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

The description indicates a read-only monitoring behavior (non-destructive). While no annotations are provided, the description discloses that it returns state information, which is sufficient for a monitoring tool. No behavioral contradictions are present.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and clearly states the return value.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema (existence indicated), the description sufficiently covers the purpose and return value. No additional context is needed for a simple monitoring tool.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add meaning beyond the schema. It appropriately describes what the tool does without parameter details.

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 monitors the current operation mode state and specifies the return includes 'Current operation mode and control state'. It uses the specific verb 'monitor' and the resource 'operation mode', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'set_operation_mode'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'monitor_motion_state', 'monitor_diagnostics'). However, the name and description imply it is for reading the operation mode, and siblings like 'set_operation_mode' suggest a clear contrast. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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