lock_file_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the primary behavioral effect (prevents deletion) and the intent (protect important versions). However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions required, or that the operation is reversible via unlock_file_snapshot. This is adequate but has gaps.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the action and outcome. It contains no filler or redundant information, earning a perfect conciseness score.

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 and no output schema, the description provides all necessary information: the action, the resource, and the purpose. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, especially given the sibling set that includes unlock and restore operations.

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 is fully self-descriptive for the single parameter snapshotId ('Snapshot ID to lock'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lock') and resource ('snapshot') and clearly states the purpose: preventing deletion and protecting important versions. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the effect (preventing deletion), which contrasts with unlock_file_snapshot and other snapshot operations.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you want to protect a snapshot from deletion. It also hints at the use case ('protect important versions'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives (e.g., unlock_file_snapshot for reversing). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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