Forces unlock of a cloud browser profile that is currently locked by another machine

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds the useful condition that the lock is held by another machine, but omits the consequence for that other machine (session termination, whether the other machine must be stopped first).

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 sentence with the key qualifier (locked by another machine) front-loaded and no redundant restatement. The lead-in 'This method can be used to' is slightly padded but negligible.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and a clear mutation intent, the description gives enough to invoke it correctly. Only the side effect on the currently holding machine is left unstated, which is a minor gap rather than a blocker.

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 description coverage is 100% with only two simple parameters, so the schema already documents profileId and workspaceId fully. The description's mention of 'specified workspace' matches the schema but adds no new syntax or format detail; 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?

States a specific verb (force unlock) and resource (cloud browser profile) with a clear pre-condition (currently locked by another machine) and scope (specified workspace). It is not, however, differentiated from the nearby recover_profile sibling, so an agent cannot tell which to prefer from the description alone.

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 phrase 'currently locked by another machine' implies when this tool is applicable, so usage is inferable. But there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over recover_profile, nor on prerequisites such as permissions or the state the profile must be in.

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