comet_mode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the action (switching modes or checking current) and lists mode options, but lacks details on permissions needed, side effects, or error handling. It's adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and lists modes with brief explanations, second explains optional usage. Every word adds value, no redundancy, and it's front-loaded with key information.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter meaning adequately. It could be more complete by mentioning return values or errors, but given the low complexity, it's mostly sufficient.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the optional 'mode' parameter with enum values. The description adds context by explaining what each mode does and the behavior when omitted, but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Switch') and resource ('Perplexity search mode'), specifies the four available modes with brief explanations, and distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on mode switching rather than asking questions, connecting, polling, etc.

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 ('Switch Perplexity search mode') and provides clear alternatives for different actions (call without mode to see current mode vs. with mode to switch). It differentiates from sibling tools by its specific function.

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