RRT Locks Overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds important behavioral context: this tool renders a UI widget for a human, not structured data for computation. It could go further in describing exact output shape, but given the zero-parameter UI nature this is strong.

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 two tight sentences: the first summarizes the widget's contents, the second states its human-facing purpose and routes to alternatives. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter, read-only UI widget, the description is complete: it explains what is rendered, for whom, and when not to use it. Annotations cover side-effect safety, and the sibling list plus explicit alternative names cover routing. Nothing needed to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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, so there are no semantics to document beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage and no params, the description's lack of parameter detail is not a gap. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is applied.

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 this tool renders a UI widget showing all lock files at a glance, including a status donut chart, Carousel, and detail table. It also differentiates itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming rrt_health / rrt_tree / rrt_artifacts / rrt_drift for cases where machine-readable values are needed.

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 gives an explicit use case ('for a human to look at') and an explicit exclusion: if the agent needs values to reason over, it should call rrt_health / rrt_tree / rrt_artifacts / rrt_drift instead. This tells the agent when to select this tool versus its siblings without inference.

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