security-lock-item-by-id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool locks an item but doesn't explain what locking entails (e.g., prevents edits, may require admin rights, or affects workflow). It mentions no side effects, error conditions, or typical outcomes, leaving significant gaps for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, direct sentence that efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, making it easy to scan and understand 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavior (e.g., what locking does, error handling), usage context, or expected results, leaving the agent with incomplete information to invoke the tool effectively in a security-sensitive operation.

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 clear descriptions for all parameters (id, force, passThru, database). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or usage tips, but the schema is comprehensive, meeting the baseline for adequate coverage.

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 action ('Lock') and resource ('a Sitecore item by its ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'security-lock-item-by-path' by specifying the ID-based approach, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other locking or security tools beyond the naming convention.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name implies it's for locking items by ID rather than path (as seen in sibling 'security-lock-item-by-path'), the description doesn't mention this distinction or any prerequisites, such as required permissions or typical use cases for locking items.

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