context-mode_set

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects or requirements. It only says 'Switch Blender interaction mode' and 'optionally activating an object first', but omits details like whether the mode switch fails if no object is active, or how the select parameter influences behavior. This is minimal for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that immediately states the primary action and a key optionality. No wasted words or redundant phrasing.

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 three parameters (including an optional object and a boolean select), a straightforward purpose, and no output schema or annotations, the description leaves significant gaps—particularly around the select parameter's function and any prerequisites or side effects. It is complete enough for a simple mode switch but not fully helpful for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only glosses over the 'object' parameter via 'optionally activating an object first' and does not mention the 'select' parameter at all. The mode enum is self-explanatory but no additional meaning is added.

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 action: switching Blender's interaction mode, and mention of optionally activating an object first differentiates it from sibling tools like context-set_active or context-select_objects. It is specific with a verb and resource.

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?

It hints at usage by noting the optional object activation, but does not explicitly contrast with other context tools or state when to prefer this over alternatives. There is no clear when/when-not guidance.

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