get_mode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Return' clearly implies a read-only operation with no side effects. The behavior is transparent for a getter with no parameters. However, it does not mention potential error conditions (e.g., if no object is active) or what the returned mode's format is, but the output schema likely covers that.

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 is front-loaded with the key action ('Return'). Every word earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 parameterless getter with an output schema (as indicated by 'Has output schema: true'), the description is complete. It states exactly what is returned, and the output schema handles the return structure. No additional context is needed.

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 accepts zero parameters, and the schema is empty (100% coverage). Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds nothing about parameters because none exist, which is appropriate.

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: 'Return current object interaction mode.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the pairing with the sibling 'set_mode' immediately differentiates it. No ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is a read-only counterpart to 'set_mode', nor does it specify any context (e.g., 'use this to check the current mode before modifying'). For a simple getter, some direction would be helpful, but it's entirely absent.

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