Is Locked

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful return behavior (True if locked, None if the user is not found), but it omits what happens when the account is not locked and does not mention permissions or search scope.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It directly states the tool's behavior and return outcomes.

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 simple read-only lookup with an output schema, the description is adequate on the return side. However, it leaves the `domain` parameter unexplained and does not fully specify the non-locked return value, so it is not complete enough to remove all ambiguity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters, but it only implicitly references `user` and says nothing about `domain`. The optional `domain` parameter is especially unclear given its null default.

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 states a specific check (account lock status) and even gives two return outcomes, so the tool's core purpose is clear. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as `is_disabled` or `locked_users`, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `is_disabled` or `locked_users`. The intended use is only implied by the name and the return semantics.

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