unlock_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains the effect of unlocking (allows other agents to work, prevents blocking) and includes a workflow, but does not disclose edge-case behaviors like ownership requirements or error conditions. Still, it provides meaningful context beyond the bare action.

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 uses clear headers, bullet points, and a numbered workflow, making it easy to scan. While it is longer than strictly necessary, the structure front-loads the core purpose and organizes guidance logically, with no fluff.

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 straightforward lock-release tool with three simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, timing, and workflow comprehensively. It integrates with sibling tools like log_change without overcomplicating, making it sufficiently complete for agent decision-making.

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 100% coverage with detailed descriptions and examples for all three parameters. The tool description does not add additional parameter-level meaning, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with a specific action verb 'Release' and a clear resource 'file locks', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lock_files by specifying the reverse operation.

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?

Provides an explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section with concrete scenarios (after changes, before switching files, at session end). It also includes an 'IMPORTANT' note about unlocking promptly and integrates with a workflow step after log_change(), giving clear sequencing context.

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