set_track_locked

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about what locking actually does (prevents clip edits/moves), whether it persists to the project file, or whether it requires an undo to reverse. 'Lock or unlock' signals a simple mutation but discloses no state or side-effect context.

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 short sentence with no filler, which is efficient, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. There is no wasted text, yet nothing is front-loaded because there is only one clause.

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 three-required-parameter boolean toggle with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but with zero annotation coverage it should have explained locking semantics and reversibility. The agent can call it correctly but cannot predict the effect with confidence.

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% and the schema already defines `locked` explicitly as 'True to lock, false to unlock' and constrains `trackType` to a video/audio enum. The description adds nothing 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?

States a specific verb (lock/unlock) against a specific resource (a track), so the agent knows exactly what changes. It does not name or differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as set_track_muted, solo_track, or rename_track, so the agent must infer that 'locked' is distinct from 'muted' or 'soloed'.

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 no guidance on when to lock a track instead of muting or soloing it, despite those siblings existing. No prerequisites, no note that locking requires no selection or an active sequence.

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