release_path

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

Without annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals that releasing a lock is a mutating operation, requires holder status, and returns a boolean indicating success. It does not detail error cases (e.g., invalid session), but the core behavior is transparent.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, then a second sentence adds constraints and return value. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no siblings), the description covers purpose, precondition, and outcome. It leaves no major gaps; the 'returns whether a lock was actually removed' implies graceful handling of non-existent locks.

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 coverage is 100% (both parameters described in schema). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it restates that session_id defaults to current session. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already explains the parameters adequately.

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 specifies the verb 'release', the resource 'path lock', and clarifies scope ('held by this session on the session bus'). It also distinguishes the action by stating 'Only the holder can release', leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 clearly says 'Only the holder can release', giving a precondition for usage. It also notes that the tool returns whether a lock was removed, which implies it is safe to call even without a lock. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios are stated.

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