lock_release

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that omitting paths releases all locks for the session, which is critical behavioral context. It does not detail potential failure modes or return values, but for a simple release operation, this is adequate.

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 concise sentences: the first states the primary action, the second provides the key condition on parameter omission. No redundant words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 simple structure (one optional parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior. Could mention error handling or return format, but not essential for this tool.

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 coverage is 100% with a description for 'paths'. The description adds the semantic nuance that omitting the parameter releases all locks, which goes beyond the schema's field description.

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 tool's action ('Release file locks') and distinguishes between releasing specific paths versus all locks for the session. This differentiates it from siblings like lock_acquire and lock_list.

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 explains when to omit the 'paths' parameter (to release all locks for the session), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the purpose is implied by the sibling names.

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