lock_content_control

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

Description only says it locks to prevent editing, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., if the control must exist), reversibility, or permissions needed. Without annotations, more details on behavior are expected.

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: one sentence for purpose and a clean bulleted args section. No unnecessary words, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameters. It lacks error handling or prerequisites, but for a basic locking action it is largely sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining the 'tag' parameter (Tag name) and the 'lock' parameter (listing valid lock types). However, it does not differentiate between the lock types or provide further details.

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 first sentence clearly states the tool locks a content control to prevent editing. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_content_control or set_content_control_value, which have different purposes.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other content control tools. The context of use is only implied by the action description, without mentioning alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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