Lock a session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the exact API operation and tag, which is minor context beyond annotations. It does not explain what locking a session actually does (e.g., invalidating a session or logging out a user), but with annotations covering the core behavioral hints, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated immediately. The first line repeats the title verbatim, and the operation/tag line is somewhat developer-oriented, but overall it is efficient with no wasted prose.

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 a single required parameter, full schema coverage, and annotations that convey the safety profile, the description is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. However, it omits what 'locking' a session means behaviorally and does not disambiguate from the sibling immich_lock_auth_session. These gaps are minor but leave the agent with an incomplete mental model of the tool's effect.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'id' already documented as format: uuid. The description says 'by id,' which identifies the parameter but adds no formatting, syntax, or constraint details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lock a specific session by id.' The added API path (POST /sessions/{id}/lock) confirms the exact operation. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling immich_lock_auth_session, leaving potential ambiguity.

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 usage by saying 'Lock a specific session by id,' but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like immich_lock_auth_session or immich_unlock_auth_session. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual triggers provided.

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