infomaniak_lock_drive_user

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, idempotent mutation. The description adds the critical behavioral detail of 'two-phase commit with current user guard', which informs the agent that a confirmation token is required and that self-locking is guarded.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that states action, endpoint, and key behavioral traits with no filler.

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 mutating tool with an output schema and annotations, the description provides the essential hint about the two-phase commit workflow, but does not fully explain the sequence of calls. This is adequate but could be more explicit.

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 covers 67% of parameters; drive_id and user_id have descriptions. The description's 'two-phase commit' hints at the purpose of the confirmation_token parameter, adding some meaning beyond its format-only schema entry.

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 uses a specific verb 'Lock' and resource 'kDrive user' with the exact HTTP endpoint, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like unlock_drive_user and delete_drive_user.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It implies usage through the name and 'Lock' action, but there is no mention of unlock/delete/update alternatives or prerequisites.

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