whatsapp_set_group_locked

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/idempotency/safety profile (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint true, destructiveHint false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value: it defines what locked mode actually restricts (only admins may edit name, description, picture), states the admin-rights requirement, and notes the return ('success confirmation').

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?

Three short front-loaded sentences: what it does, what the state means, prerequisite and return. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies a return indication ('success confirmation') and covers the permission precondition and behavioral effect, which is sufficient for a simple 2-parameter toggle. An explicit tie-break against the near-identical group-settings siblings would make it complete.

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% and both parameters (id, enabled) are documented there, so baseline is 3. The description implies the enabled boolean's on/off semantics but adds no format or identifier detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Turn locked mode on or off') tied to a specific group setting, and explains the resulting effect on name/description/picture editing. The resource is clear and distinct, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the adjacent group-setting siblings (set_group_announce, set_group_join_approval).

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?

'Requires admin rights' gives a concrete precondition for invocation, and the description frames the two states (on/off) so the agent knows the calling context. No explicit exclusions or named alternatives are provided, so it falls short of a 5.

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