bw_unlock

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that changes are discarded, the lock is freed without activation, and for DTPs the framework enqueue lock is released. It does not cover error conditions or authorization, but is transparent about core side effects.

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 sentences, no filler, and each sentence earns its place: the core action, the concrete use case, and the important DTP-specific caveat. Front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is nearly complete. It covers behavior, use case, and a critical edge case. Minor gaps like idempotency or failure responses keep it from a 5.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the special meaning of dtpa (DTP framework enqueue lock) and how the object type/name combine in the unlock operation.

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 and resource: 'Release a lock on a BW object without activating it.' It also differentiates from sibling actions like bw_activate by explicitly noting the operation does not activate the object.

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 gives explicit use context: 'Use this to discard changes and free the lock, e.g., after an aborted create or update.' It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the usage guidance is concrete and actionable.

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