sub_modes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Raw sub-mode state dump' implies a read-oriented, unprocessed output and gives some sense of the return nature, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or mention auth, side effects, or limitations.

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?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. The parenthetical CLI hint and compound-mode example are useful, though the sentence is slightly dense and could be split for readability.

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 two-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description gives a minimal but usable indication of what is returned ('raw sub-mode state dump'). It is adequate for invocation but does not explain the return structure or clarify how the raw dump should be interpreted.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the peripheral-scoped nature of the call ('for one peripheral') but adds no additional syntax or semantic detail 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 states a specific action and resource: a raw sub-mode state dump for one peripheral, with a CLI equivalent (`get sub-modes`). It also gives a concrete use case (compound modes such as SYS/NVIC), though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like `submode_state` or `nvic_read`.

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 implies usage for compound modes such as SYS/NVIC, which gives the agent some context. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as `submode_state` or `nvic_read`, nor does it name any exclusions.

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