force_unlock_stuck_jobs

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool force unlocks multiple jobs, but does not disclose potential side effects, whether it is destructive, or what happens to currently running jobs.

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 two sentences, front-loads the main action, and every word adds value. No unnecessary information.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the purpose and usage context. It lacks details on reversibility or logs but is adequate for a simple utility tool.

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 input schema already has 100% coverage for the single parameter, including a detailed description, min/max, and default. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool force unlocks all stuck scraping jobs, using a specific verb ('force unlock') and resource ('stuck scraping jobs'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'force_unlock_job' (singular) and 'cancel_scrape_job'.

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 context about when to use this tool ('useful for system recovery after crashes or network issues'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like 'force_unlock_job'.

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