agentbus_lock_renew

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a mutation (extending TTL) but lacks details on errors (e.g., expired lease), side effects, idempotency, or auth requirements. The term 'heartbeat' hints at periodic use but not explicitly.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, which is concise. However, it is overly brief given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no annotations) and could benefit from additional sentences to improve completeness.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema not referenced, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, preconditions (e.g., lease must be active), or behavior under edge cases.

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 input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description provides no parameter information, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema. Despite the 0-param baseline being 4, the description fails to compensate, resulting in a low score.

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 specific action: 'Extend TTL on an active lease (heartbeat).' The verb 'Extend' and resource 'TTL on an active lease' are precise. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like acquire, release, and status by focusing on renewal.

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 for extending an existing lease's TTL, which is a common lease pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., acquire for new leases, release for termination) or include any when-not conditions.

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