Lock Google Account (close + re-encrypt)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the saved session is kept and that reopening works without re-login, and notes it is the manual version of auto-lock. However, it does not mention any side effects (e.g., impact on tabs, ongoing processes) or rate limits, leaving gaps in comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action. The 'Args:' section is somewhat redundant given the single parameter, but overall it is well-structured and efficient.

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 has only one required parameter and no enums, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. However, since an output schema is present, the description could mention what the tool returns to ensure full completeness.

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 description simply repeats 'The account id to lock' for the single parameter account_id, which adds minimal value beyond the schema's title 'Account Id'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should provide more context about acceptable values or format but does not.

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 'Lock an account — close the browser and re-encrypt its profile.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like gv_close_account and gv_unlock by explaining that the session is preserved for later reopening without re-login.

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 explicitly says 'Use it when you're done with an account for now but want to come back to it later without re-authenticating.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly compare with alternatives like gv_logout or gv_close_account.

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