Revdoku

Bucket Lock Files

bucket_lock_files

Lock one or more bucket files before editing so other agents can see this connector is working.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`paths`	Yes	Bucket-relative file paths to lock or unlock.
`message`	Yes	Optional lock message explaining why the bucket or files are locked.
`bucket_id`	Yes	Revdoku bucket id returned by bucket_list or bucket_get, for example bkt_...
`account_id`	No	Optional account id from revdoku_status.accounts for this call only. Omit for the credential's default account. Client accounts require explicit Agency authorization; never infer an account from a bucket id.
`duration_seconds`	No	Optional lock duration in seconds.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`files`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 8, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / account_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional account id from revdoku_status.accounts for this call only. Omit for the credential's default account. Client accounts require explicit Agency authorization; never infer an account from a bucket id.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedAug 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) so mutation is expected. The description adds context about the purpose (locking for editing and visibility to other agents), but does not disclose additional behavioral details like lock reversal, duration parameters, or side effects on concurrent access. Some value is added, but it is not extensive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and purpose, making it immediately understandable. Every word contributes to the meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a locking operation with a fairly simple interface, the description covers the essential purpose and timing. The presence of an output schema and high schema coverage compensates for missing return details. It lacks explicit mention of unlocking or related tools, but that is not critical for basic usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description text adds little beyond the schema—it mentions 'one or more bucket files' which loosely relates to the paths parameter, but no deeper semantics like how message or duration_seconds affect behavior are provided. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema covers everything.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (lock) and resource (bucket files) and adds the purpose (before editing). It is concise and unambiguous, though it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like bucket_lock (which likely locks the whole bucket).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for locking files before editing and mentions visibility to other agents, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives such as bucket_lock or bucket_unlock_file. The usage context is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with siblings.

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

All Revdoku tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.