Lock or unlock a domain

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

Beyond the annotation idempotentHint, the description explains the behavior of idempotency in plain terms ('setting the state it is already in is a no-op') and adds the rationale for locking (transfer protection). It does not cover edge cases like permissions, but the annotation set already provides the safety profile.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the most important operational caveat. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy or 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?

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema and detailed annotations, the description covers purpose, the transfer-use case, and idempotency. Nothing necessary for correct selection or invocation is missing; the context is complete.

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 schema already describes the 'locked' parameter (true = LOCK, false = UNLOCK), so the tool description reinforces this with the transfer context. For the 'domain' parameter, schema coverage is absent, but the description implies it's the domain being locked without adding format details. Overall, the description adds meaning by connecting parameter values to real-world transfer behavior.

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 opens with 'Set the registrar lock on a domain', a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this tool from domain siblings (e.g., get_domain_info, transfer_domain) by focusing on the registrar lock and adding the dual unlock/transfer guidance.

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?

It explicitly states that locking protects against unauthorised transfers and gives a concrete rule: 'you must UNLOCK before transferring a domain away.' This tells the agent when the tool is necessary. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling offers the same lock functionality, so the guidance is sufficient.

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