disable_dev_mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It reveals an authentication requirement (write secret) and implies a state change, but does not describe side effects, reversibility, or consequences of disabling dev mode. This is a minimal but not wholly absent disclosure.

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 two short sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and immediately follows with the critical prerequisite.

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 simple toggle action with one parameter, the description covers the essential purpose and a key requirement. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the description omits any mention of success/failure indicators, error scenarios, or state confirmation, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'secret' parameter. It indicates the secret is for write access, but does not explain its format, source, or why it is required beyond a simple prerequisite. The semantic value added is minimal.

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 'disable' and the resource 'developer mode', making the purpose obvious. It implicitly differentiates from the sibling 'enable_dev_mode', though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 mentions a prerequisite (write secret) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like enable_dev_mode or the other write toggles. No context about typical workflows or conditions.

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