get_istoreos_mode

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

The description indicates a safe read operation (getting info) but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond that. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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 concise sentence that efficiently lists the returned data. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is clear and compact.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the purpose and returned data. It does not elaborate on specifics like 'mode' values, but the output schema likely fills gaps, making it adequately complete.

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 zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so parameter semantics are inherently clear. The description adds value by enumerating the output fields (mode, hostname, firmware version, etc.), exceeding the baseline expectation.

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 retrieves iStoreOS system info and lists specific items (mode, hostname, firmware version, iStore packages, overlay usage). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_system_info by focusing on iStoreOS-specific details.

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?

The description implies use for getting iStoreOS mode and related info but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings or when not to use it. Usage context is implied but not delimited.

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