delegate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses billing implications, read-only safety default, write mode boundaries (files under cwd), background behavior, and immediate return of a task id for background tasks. This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 three sentences, each earning its place. It front-loads the main purpose, then clarifies modes and background behavior, then gives a prerequisite. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema and annotations, the description covers the tool's core behavior, modes, background task management, and prerequisites. It does not specify the return format for non-background tasks, but the description is otherwise complete for a delegation tool of moderate complexity.

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 schema covers all 6 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining mode semantics, background return behavior, and the requirement to check list_providers for the provider parameter, enriching an already fully documented 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?

The description uses a specific verb+resource: 'Hand a task to another coding agent via its CLI.' It clearly distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings by mentioning delegation, billing via subscription, and referencing list_providers/tasks_* tools for related functionality.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'Call list_providers first to see what is installed' is an explicit prerequisite. It also explains mode and background usage, but does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use delegate.

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