freeze_objects

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; the description goes further by disclosing the exact state change (unselectable/untransformable) and explicitly noting visibility/rendering is preserved. It does not mention reversibility (e.g. unfreeze_all), but the core behavioral traits are well covered.

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 copy is compact and front-loads the behavior before the use case. The Chinese/English duplication is reasonable for a bilingual tool but means the two sentences carry the same information, so it is not maximally economical.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what happens to the objects and why to use it. It could mention that the operation can be undone via unfreeze_all, but that is not required to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%: the objects parameter is documented as a name list that falls back to the current selection when omitted. The tool description only refers to 'given objects' and adds no semantic value beyond the schema, so the 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 states a specific action ('freeze given objects') and precisely characterizes the result as unselectable/untransformable but still visible/renderable, which clearly separates it from hide_objects/delete_objects. It also adds a concrete use case (locking background reference props), so an agent knows what the tool is for.

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?

It explicitly recommends the tool for locking background reference objects, giving clear context. It does not name alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, but the visible/renderable qualifier effectively rules out using it when hiding is intended.

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