Lock Private Profiles (Logout)

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: closing private contexts, switching to a public profile, and explicitly stating it does not sign out of Google. It also explains the effect on private profiles becoming hidden until unlocked. This is comprehensive for a zero-parameter 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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. The most important action ('Lock the private/public gate') is front-loaded. Each sentence adds distinct value: function, process, and caveat.

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 zero parameters and the existence of an output schema (not shown but present), the description is complete. It explains the effect, what happens to private profiles, and how to unlock. No gaps remain for an agent to interpret.

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 tool has no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it correctly focuses on behavior and context. The schema coverage is 100% (trivially), so no additional detail is needed.

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 uses specific verbs ('Lock', 'closes', 'switches') and resources ('private/public gate', 'private browser contexts', 'active account'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like gv_sign_out (signing out of Google) and gv_unlock (reversing the lock), stating explicitly what it does and does not do.

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 implies when to use this tool (to lock private profiles) and mentions that gv_unlock can reverse it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for similar operations, though the context of sibling tools provides some implicit guidance.

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