unlock_safety_profile

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It says 'unlock' but does not explain what this entails (e.g., reversibility, side effects), required permissions, or error handling. The enterprise flag is a prerequisite, not a 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, concise and front-loaded with the action. Each sentence adds distinct information (purpose, enterprise, effect). Could be slightly more structured, but efficient.

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 and lack of annotations/output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover prerequisites, expected behavior if already unlocked, or any consequences. More details are needed for full usability.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It specifies 'printer_model' as a 'Profile identifier', adding context beyond the schema title, but lacks details on format or source. Parameter semantics are minimal.

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 'unlock' and the resource 'safety profile', and distinguishes from siblings like 'lock_safety_profile' and 'get_safety_profile'. It also mentions the enterprise nature and purpose of allowing community profile modifications.

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 implies use when a safety profile is locked and modifications are needed. It notes 'Enterprise feature', indicating a prerequisite, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives.

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