Switch Perplexity's search mode to match your goal: basic search, deep research, analytics, or learning. Omit the mode parameter to view the current mode.
Switch Perplexity search mode. Modes: 'search' (basic), 'research' (deep research), 'labs' (analytics/visualization), 'learn' (educational). Call without mode to see current mode.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | No | Mode to switch to (optional - omit to see current mode) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.6.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that calling without mode retrieves the current state (read behavior) and calling with mode switches it (write behavior). However, it does not mention any side effects, prerequisites, or what happens on failure.
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 extremely concise, using three short sentences. It front-loads the action and lists modes efficiently, with no redundant information.
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 is simple, but the description lacks details about return values (e.g., confirmation or error messages). It implies a read behavior without mode but does not specify output format. Given the simplicity, it is somewhat adequate but has gaps.
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 coverage is 100% with an enum and description. The description adds value by explaining each mode's purpose in parentheses, which is more informative than the enum labels alone. This complements the schema effectively.
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 verb 'Switch' and the resource 'Perplexity search mode', listing all modes with brief explanations. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., comet_ask, comet_connect) by focusing solely on mode management.
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 explicitly instructs when to call without a mode to see the current mode, providing clear usage context. However, it does not offer guidance on when to use specific modes or alternatives among the modes themselves.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.