nexus_lock_comment_thread

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read, idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the permission requirement and the return shape ('JSON {commentThread: {id, lockedAt}} or an error string'). No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and well-organized: purpose, prerequisite, and return value are each presented in a single line. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important 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?

For a one-parameter, non-destructive mutation with an output schema, the description covers the essential operational details: what is locked, who may do it, and what the response looks like. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly distinguishing thread locking from comment locking, but nothing critical 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter's description ('Comment thread ID to lock.') fully explains its meaning. The tool description does not add significant parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Lock') and resource ('a comment thread'), with a clarifying example ('e.g. a mod's comments page'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes the thread-level operation from sibling tools like nexus_lock_comment.

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 provides clear context and a prerequisite ('Requires moderator permissions or thread ownership'), but it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives such as nexus_lock_comment, hide_comment, or moderation-clear tools. Usage is implied rather than explicitly scoped.

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