tesla_lock

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits such as whether locking confirms visually, requires the car to be in park, or affects all doors including trunk. The current description only restates the action with no additional behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: three words with no filler. Every word is necessary, but it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema needed), the description is nearly complete. However, it could mention that the action locks all doors and perhaps that it is a remote command, but the sibling context and tool name make this fairly clear.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. A score of 4 is the baseline for no parameters, as the description adds no extra meaning but is not detrimental.

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 action ('Lock') and the resource ('all doors'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish it from the sibling tool `tesla_unlock` or clarify its scope (e.g., does it include trunk?).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `tesla_unlock`, `tesla_flash`, or `tesla_honk`. The agent receives no context about prerequisites or typical usage scenarios.

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