context-mesh_select_mode

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden, but it only states the action without disclosing side effects, whether it requires edit mode, whether it affects only the active mesh, or any persistence or UI-state changes. This is a significant gap.

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, compact sentence with no filler. It is appropriately front-loaded and wastes no words, though the brevity sacrifices depth.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to mention when it applies (edit mode), which objects it affects, or the significance of the combined enum modes, leaving the agent without key operating context.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it adds nothing beyond the schema. The enum values (VERT, EDGE, FACE, etc.) are self-explanatory, yet the description neither explains their meaning nor how the mode parameter behaves in combination.

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 'Set mesh edit selection mode' clearly states the tool's function: it changes the selection mode for mesh editing. It uses a specific verb+resource and is distinguishable from general mode-setting siblings like context-mode_set, though it could be more explicit about the object scope.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites such as being in edit mode or having a mesh selected, nor any comparison with related tools like context-mode_set or mesh-select_all.

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