lock_vault

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

Annotations mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond that: it discloses the concrete effect (removing the key from the keychain) and the consequential asymmetry that unlocking requires the user. No permissions or reversibility details, but strong for its size.

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?

Two short sentences with the action and its consequence front-loaded and zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs: the action, its side effect, and the fact that recovery requires the user. No return format is described, but that is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing inputs and focuses on the action's effect.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lock the vault') and immediately clarifies the effect with 'removes the key from the keychain.' It implicitly distinguishes itself from unlock_vault via the note that 'Unlocking needs the user,' giving an agent enough to tell the two apart.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'now' and the remark about unlocking requiring the user; there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. Adequate for such a simple action but not instructive.

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