Result set view locked

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation/idempotency profile is covered. The description adds the linking behavior ("true = linked"), which is genuine context, but says nothing about what state changes or what the toggle affects.

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 compact sentence with the toggle semantics parenthesized at the end. Front-loaded and free of filler, though the "Lock/link" duality makes the opening slightly ambiguous.

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 one-parameter toggle whose annotations already carry the safety profile, the description is roughly sufficient to call it. It stops short of describing the effect of the toggle or the return, so it is minimally complete rather than thorough.

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 0% and the schema only types the parameter as boolean. The description compensates by explaining "true = linked" — the key semantic for the single parameter — but leaves the false case and the exact link target to inference. Partial compensation for a 1-param tool.

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?

"Lock/link the result view for side-by-side compare" gives a specific verb (lock/link) and resource (result view) with the intended context. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling result_* tools (colormap, legend, time), but the toggle semantics are clear enough to identify the tool.

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?

"for side-by-side compare" implies the usage context, giving the agent a reason to invoke it. However, there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no reference to alternative result_* tools that might be confused with it.

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