exit_plan_mode

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: the tool blocks the agent run until user decision, and explains the approval flow. It also mentions deferred approval on certain clients. Lacks mention of side effects or permissions, but is sufficient for the tool's function.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose first, then conditions, then arguments. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The tool has 2 parameters and no output description despite having output schema. The description covers usage and parameters well but omits return value details. Still complete enough for agent decision-making.

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 description explains both parameters: plan is 'The full step-by-step plan, in markdown' and todos is 'Optional updated todo list to persist alongside the plan.' This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, especially given 0% schema description coverage.

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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'Submit your completed plan and wait for user approval.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like enter_plan_mode by specifying that this ends plan mode with user approval.

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 explicitly states when to call it: 'Call this ONLY after you have a concrete, actionable plan.' It details the two possible outcomes (approve/deny) and behavior on different clients, providing clear guidance on when to use and what to expect.

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