github_issues_lock

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

The description provides no details beyond 'lock'. It does not disclose that locking an issue prevents new comments (but does not close it), or any side effects. Since there are no annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to provide behavioral context.

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 extremely concise (three words), but at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded, but lacks sufficient detail.

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 that this is a mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what locking an issue entails, any prerequisites, or the effect on the issue.

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% (all parameters have descriptions, though minimal). The description adds no additional meaning about parameters like 'body' (which is optional) or the required ones. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Lock an issue' clearly states the action (lock) and the resource (issue). Among sibling tools like github_issues_unlock and github_issues_create, it uniquely identifies a specific operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool (e.g., to prevent further comments on a resolved or controversial issue) or when not to use it (e.g., if the issue is already locked). No alternatives mentioned.

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