renew_lease

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the failure condition (expired/reclaimed returns renewed:false) and advises against assuming continued ownership. It could mention the success response more explicitly, but it's adequately transparent.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and then the conditional failure behavior. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description covers the return behavior (renewed:false on failure) and the action to take. It could specify the success response more fully, but it's sufficient for a simple 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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that lease_token comes from lease_account and that ttl_seconds defaults to server default, providing context beyond the schema.

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 action ('Extend (heartbeat) the current lease') and the purpose ('so long-running work is not reclaimed out from under you'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like lease_account (acquiring) and release_account (releasing) by focusing on renewal.

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 explains when to use (to prevent reclamation) and what to do if renewal fails ('call lease_account again'). It provides clear context but does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternative tools, though siblings are distinct.

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