turn_safe_mode_on

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a state-changing operation (turn on) that restricts AutoBot's access to screen layout and notifications. However, it doesn't mention permission requirements, reversibility (though 'turn_safe_mode_off' exists), side effects, or error conditions beyond the generic return message mention.

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 appropriately brief (three lines) and front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence adds important behavioral context, and the third clarifies return type. No redundant information is present, though the structure could be slightly more polished.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and no annotations are provided, the description is moderately complete. It explains the action and key restrictions but lacks details about error conditions, side effects, or integration with other tools. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but more operational context would be helpful.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't waste space discussing non-existent parameters, though it could theoretically mention that no configuration options are available for this operation.

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 ('Turn on safe mode') and specifies the resource affected (AutoBot's capabilities). It distinguishes from sibling 'turn_safe_mode_off' by indicating the opposite state change. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from 'is_safe_mode' which checks status rather than changing it.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description mentions what safe mode does but doesn't specify scenarios for activation, prerequisites, or when to choose this over other control tools. The sibling list includes related tools but no comparative context is given.

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