eda_sys_environment_is_online_mode

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the disclosure burden and does state that the method returns a boolean indicating online-mode status. This is minimally adequate for a simple read-only predicate, but it does not define what 'online mode' means, how it relates to offline/half-offline modes, or whether any runtime conditions can affect the result.

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 short and front-loads the method signature, which is helpful. However, the Chinese phrase `是否为在线模式` appears twice, making the content somewhat redundant, and the structure is just a terse signature plus a duplicated translation.

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 environment predicate with no required parameters, the signature and return hint are enough to invoke the call correctly. However, the description omits any context about when online mode matters, what distinguishes it from sibling mode checks, and what the returned boolean should be used for.

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%, with the schema already documenting `args` and `windowId`. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies because the structured schema is doing the heavy lifting.

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 identifies the tool as a boolean query for whether the environment is in online mode, with the method signature `sys_Environment.isOnlineMode() -> boolean` and the Chinese phrase `是否为在线模式`. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling predicates like `eda_sys_environment_is_offline_mode` or `eda_sys_environment_is_half_offline_mode`, but the purpose is 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus related environment predicates such as `_is_offline_mode`, `_is_half_offline_mode`, `_is_client`, or `_is_web`. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and the generic 'environment' domain.

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