AppLock status

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe, non-mutating call, so the description earns credit for going further by enumerating the specific state fields the caller will learn (setup, lock state, hidden count, extension connection). It does not discuss permissions, caching, or refresh behavior, so it falls short of full disclosure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that lists the returned state facts with no filler or redundancy. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey what the call returns, and it does so completely: setup status, locked/unlocked, hidden chat count, and extension connectivity. For a zero-parameter read tool, nothing an agent needs to invoke or interpret it 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 takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; there is nothing to misinterpret, and the description correctly implies the call is parameterless by framing it as a global status query.

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?

States a specific read verb ('Shows whether') and the exact resource and facts reported: setup state, locked/unlocked, hidden chat count, and browser-extension connectivity. This is clearly separable from siblings like hide_session, unlock_vault, or list_hidden, which mutate or enumerate sessions rather than report AppLock state.

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 implies a status-check use case (e.g., before locking/unlocking) but never says when to call it versus alternatives such as list_hidden or unlock_vault, nor any prerequisites. Usage is inferable from the intent but not spelled out.

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