List Current PostgreSQL Locks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: privilege requirement, output format options, and the effect of the include_granted parameter. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with a clear summary, usage line, argument list, returns section, and note. Every sentence adds value, and it is appropriately concise.

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 2 optional parameters, good annotations, and no output schema, the description fairly complete. It explains the output structure for both JSON and Markdown formats. Minor gap: no detailed column list, but overall sufficient.

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%, and the description explains both parameters (include_granted and response_format) with defaults and their role. It adds meaning beyond schema by stating defaults and context.

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 it shows currently active locks and waiting queries, using specific verb 'Show' and resource 'locks'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pg_active_queries by focusing on lock contention, deadlocks, and long-running transactions.

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 explicitly mentions debugging lock contention, deadlocks, and long-running transactions. It also notes the privilege requirement. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or contrast with alternatives.

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