enable_dev_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. It states the action and the required secret but does not disclose side effects, reversibility (though disable_dev_mode exists), idempotency, or what changes occur in the system. This is minimal and leaves the agent guessing about consequences.

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?

Two short sentences with no fluff. The purpose is front-loaded and the requirement is stated second. It is efficient for a simple tool, though it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 mode toggle with an output schema (present but not shown), the description still omits key behavioral context: what developer mode enables, whether it is safe to call repeatedly, and what the output represents. With no annotations, this is inadequate for an agent to call it confidently.

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 explain the parameter. It only says 'Requires the write secret', which clarifies it is a secret for write operations, but doesn't specify format, origin, or validity conditions. This is insufficient to compensate for the missing schema detail.

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 action ('Enable developer mode') and identifies the resource (developer mode). It distinguishes from siblings like disable_dev_mode by the verb. However, it doesn't explain what developer mode entails or its scope, which is a minor gap but not a fundamental one.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as enable_writes or enable_dangerous_writes. It only mentions the requirement of the write secret, which is a prerequisite but not a selection criterion. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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