lock_filter

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the underlying flag being set (isLockedInViewMode) and the matching logic on table[field], which is useful. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, reversibility (locked=false), or behavior when the filter does not exist, which are important for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action 'LOCK'. Every sentence adds meaningful information: the purpose, scope requirements, and the flag affected. No wasted words.

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 tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, the description covers core purpose, scope dependencies, and matching logic. It does not explain return values or error scenarios, but given the tool's simple nature and schema coverage, it is reasonably complete. A perfect score would require more about edge cases.

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 high (86%), and the description adds valuable dependency semantics among scope, page, and visual, which are not apparent from the schema alone. It clarifies that table[field] identifies the filter and that the locked parameter controls the flag. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 tool LOCKS a filter in view mode, with specific reference to the filter pane and viewer permissions. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_visual_filter, add_report_filter, or hide_filter, which perform different actions on filters.

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 scope-specific usage requirements (visual needs page+visual; page needs page), which helps the agent select correct parameter combinations. It does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool in favor of alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a single-purpose tool.

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