lock_safety_profile

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 that locking rejects community profile updates and that only admins can unlock. This is fairly transparent for a lock operation, though it doesn't mention side effects on existing agents or reversibility beyond admin unlock.

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 concise with a clear first sentence stating purpose, followed by relevant details about enterprise feature and admin unlock. The Args section is structured and adds value without fluff.

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 tool's simplicity (1 required parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains the purpose, usage context, and parameter semantics. No additional information is needed.

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 description adds significant value beyond the input schema. It provides an example ('e.g. 'ender3'') and clarifies that the parameter is a 'Profile identifier'. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates fully.

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 'Lock a safety profile' and the resource 'safety profile', with a concise explanation of the effect ('agents cannot modify its limits'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like unlock_safety_profile or list_safety_profiles.

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 mentions it's an 'Enterprise feature' and that 'Only an admin can unlock', providing context for when this tool is applicable. It also says 'When locked, community profile updates for this printer model are rejected', which implies when not to use. However, it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or exclusions.

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