lock_components

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals that distances are always in millimetres regardless of document units, and explains that dry_run=true previews without writing while dry_run=false writes after inspecting the preview with expected_sha256. This covers the mutating nature and a safety mechanism, though it doesn't detail reversibility or permissions.

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, each with specific value: purpose, unit caveat, and dry_run workflow. No redundant phrasing and information is front-loaded.

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 lack of annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description provides core workflow but omits details on how selector, path, and txid are used, and what locking implies in the broader design. The output schema may cover return values, but overall completeness is moderate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains dry_run and expected_sha256, but doesn't clarify path, txid, or selector. 'Selected' in the purpose hints at selector, but the parameters are not fully described.

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's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Lock selected PCB components or schematic parts.' It distinguishes from siblings like unlock_components, move_components, etc., by focusing on the locking action and applicable object types.

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?

Provides clear usage instructions for dry_run and expected_sha256, including a conditional: 'Set dry_run=false only after inspecting the preview and pass its expected_sha256.' Also warns about units. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use vs alternatives like unlock_components or when not to use, but the context is sufficient.

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