lock_domain

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior by mentioning the resulting status ('clientTransferProhibited'). However, it fails to describe the effect of 'unlock', potential side effects (e.g., whois changes), or required permissions, limiting full transparency.

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 extremely concise—just two sentences—with no redundant information. Every word contributes to clarity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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's simplicity, good schema coverage, and lack of output schema, the description is fairly complete. It could mention the reverse effect of 'unlock' and what the tool returns (e.g., success flag), but overall covers core functionality well.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by elaborating on the 'lock' parameter's purpose ('enables clientTransferProhibited status') and clarifying the enum actions, which enriches the semantic meaning beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 a specific verb ('Lock or unlock') and resource ('domain'), and clearly states the purpose: 'transfer protection'. It also explains the mechanism ('clientTransferProhibited status'), making it highly distinct from sibling tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_dns, set_privacy). It does not specify prerequisites or when not to lock a domain, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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