set_dark_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 of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the state change but does not mention any side effects, error conditions (e.g., unsupported system), persistence, or permission requirements. For a mutation operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences that state the purpose and the parameter semantics without any extraneous text. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 with only one parameter, and the description covers the core purpose and parameter. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance and behavioral caveats. Given that an output schema exists, return values are likely covered, but the absence of any mention of when to use this over toggle_dark_mode or potential failure modes leaves some 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?

The description fully explains the only parameter 'enabled': 'True for dark mode, False for light mode.' This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only lists the property as a boolean without semantic context, and schema description coverage is 0%. The single parameter is completely clarified.

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 function: 'Set dark mode to a specific state.' This distinguishes it from the sibling tool toggle_dark_mode, which flips the current state, and is_dark_mode, which queries it. The verb 'set' plus resource 'dark mode' is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage: use when you want to explicitly set dark mode to on or off. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using toggle_dark_mode when you simply want to invert the current state. The context is present but not fully articulated.

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