unlock_adom

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

The description states the tool releases a lock, which implies mutation. With no annotations, it carries the burden of transparency. It does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the ADOM is already unlocked, leaving some behavioral details unclear.

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 concise with two sentences plus structured Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Could be slightly more compact, but overall efficient.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description covers the action, a prerequisite (commit), and the return format. It is reasonably complete given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema description. Minor omissions like checking lock status don't severely impact completeness.

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 only parameter 'adom' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description adds meaning: 'ADOM name to unlock', which clarifies what the parameter refers to beyond just the type and title. This compensates for the schema gap.

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 verb 'unlock' and the resource 'ADOM (workspace mode)', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is distinct from siblings like 'lock_adom' and 'commit_adom'.

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 a clear usage instruction: 'Changes should be committed before unlocking to persist them.' This tells the agent when to use the tool (after committing). However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, missing some guidance.

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