lock_lock_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation (listing locks) and mentions the return structure, but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, has no side effects, or describe any prerequisites. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 brief sentences with no redundant words. Each sentence adds value: the first states the action and scope, the second describes the return format. Highly efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, output schema exists), the description adequately covers its functionality. It mentions the return object structure, which reduces the burden on the output schema. For a list tool, it is complete enough, though it could hint at potential empty results or large outputs.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage). With no parameters, the baseline is 4. The description reinforces that the tool lists all locks without filters, which aligns with the schema. No additional param info is needed.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'all currently held locks', clearly stating the tool's function. It also specifies the return format '{locks, count}', which adds clarity and distinguishes it from sibling lock tools that perform actions like acquire, release, or check status.

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?

Description states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like lock_lock_status or lock_lock_stats. There is no explicit when-not to use or mention of preferred contexts.

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