lock_list

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

Description mentions output fields (owner, PID, timestamp, alive status) but does not disclose behavioral details like permissions required, performance impacts, or whether it shows a snapshot. With no annotations, this is a minimal but acceptable disclosure for a simple read-only tool.

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?

Single sentence that immediately states the action and output details. No wasted words, front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and a simple listing operation, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. No missing information.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is automatically 100%. The description adds valuable information about what the tool outputs, which is beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description's detail on output fields elevates it to 5.

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?

Clear verb 'list' specifies the action precisely, and the resource is 'current file locks' with enumerated details (owner, PID, timestamp, alive status). Differentiates from siblings which are mutating actions (acquire, cleanup, release).

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 explicit usage guidance or alternatives provided. However, the name and description imply it is for viewing current locks, and sibling tools are all mutating, so the purpose is distinct. Missing explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' statements.

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