simplisafe_list_locks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the default fresh re-poll of the base station, the cost of that poll, and the fact that readings can be stale if force_update is disabled. It stops short of noting rate limits or multi-system behavior.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and followed by the one non-obvious behavior (default polling). The quoted rationale is slightly chatty but earns its place by justifying the default. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and the key `serial` identifier. Annotations cover the read-only profile, and the parameter contract is documented in the schema, so an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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%, so both `sid` and `force_update` are fully documented structurally, which sets the baseline at 3. The description reinforces the fresh-poll default for `force_update` but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail the schema lacks.

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 and resource ('List the smart locks on a system') plus exactly what each entry contains: state (locked/unlocked/jammed), lock and keypad battery, and keypad connectivity. It also cross-references the sibling it feeds into by naming the `serial` that simplisafe_set_lock_state consumes, which differentiates it from simplisafe_list_sensors and friends.

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?

Explains the freshness tradeoff explicitly ('Polls the base station fresh by default, because a stale answer to "is my door locked?" is worse than a slow one') and tells the agent when to override it. It does not name an alternative tool for cached reads or state any exclusions, so it falls just short of the explicit when/when-not/alternatives bar.

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