Enable Object Lock on a Scaleway bucket (ONE-WAY, irreversible)

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

Beyond annotations (which indicate destructive and open-world), the description discloses critical behavioral traits: irreversibility, permanent versioning freeze, rejection of disable attempts, and the non-functional alternative at bucket creation. It does not contradict any annotations; in fact, it enriches them with specific consequences and verification details.

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 dense with high-value information, each sentence serving a purpose: defining the action, warning irreversibility, stating prerequisites and workarounds, and noting deletion behavior. It is front-loaded with the core action and consequence, with no redundant phrasing.

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 an irreversible operation with four parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: prerequisites, fallback behavior, alternative methods (and why they fail), and post-condition deletion behavior. This is sufficient for an agent to make an informed decision and execute correctly.

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% (all four parameters described), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the rationale for enable_versioning_if_needed (avoids InvalidBucketState) and ties the confirm parameter implicitly to the one-way door concept. While not exhaustive, it meaningfully supplements the schema with contextual reasoning.

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 purpose: 'Enable Object Lock (WORM: object versions can never be deleted before their retention expires)'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like scaleway_s3_get_object_lock by emphasizing the enabling action and its one-way nature.

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 explicit usage guidance: notes the prerequisite of versioning being enabled, the parameter to handle it automatically, and explicitly states that creating a bucket with object lock at creation time is not possible on Scaleway and this tool is the only working path. Also clarifies that an empty locked bucket can still be deleted, helping agents decide when to use this tool.

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