set_debug_mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It mentions that the tool 'exposes internal signals in blackbox debug fields' but does not disclose side effects, persistence, or whether a reboot is required. Critical traits like immediacy of effect or potential impact on system behavior are omitted.

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, containing a single, well-structured sentence that packs essential information. The enumeration of modes with brief parenthetical explanations is efficient. However, a bulleted list could improve readability slightly, but it is not overly verbose.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should cover return behavior, persistence, and side effects. It explains the tool's action and parameter options but omits whether changes take effect immediately or require a reboot, leaving the agent with incomplete information for safe invocation.

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 input schema only describes 'value' as a string with a generic description. The tool's description compensates by listing and explaining each key mode (e.g., 'FFT_FREQ (filter frequency analysis)'), adding significant semantic meaning beyond the schema alone. This helps an agent select appropriate values.

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 purpose: 'Set debug_mode: Select which internal signals are exposed in blackbox debug fields.' It identifies the specific resource (debug_mode) and the action (set), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_debug_mode and other set_* tools. The enumeration of key modes adds specificity.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_debug_mode for reading or other set_* tools for different parameters. While the context implies use when changing debug mode, there is no guidance on prerequisites, frequency, or when not to use it.

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