release_lock

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds context that 'The intent is committed to session history' and implies the lock is released, but it does not disclose potential failure modes, ownership checks, or side effects beyond the intent being logged.

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 three sentences with no fluff: purpose, usage guidance, and a behavioral note. Each sentence earns its place and the structure front-loads the core purpose.

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 simple lock-release tool, the description covers the core function, when to call it, and a behavioral side effect. It does not cover error cases or the optional agent_name parameter, but these are reasonably handled by the schema and the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters; it does not mention agent_name or provide additional detail about filepath that is not already in 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 ('Release') and the resource ('a previously acquired lock on a file'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on a single file lock, which contrasts with force_release_all and acquire_lock.

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 explicit timing: 'Call this after finishing edits to allow other agents to work on the file.' This gives clear usage context but does not mention alternatives or when not to use (e.g., force_release_all).

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