delimit_agent_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only check but does not explicitly state non-destructiveness or any authorization requirements. Adding a note like 'This tool does not modify any state' would improve transparency.

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 extremely concise with two sentences: the first states the core function, and the second offers usage guidance. No unnecessary words, and the structure is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description adequately covers the purpose and usage. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. A minor gap is lack of mention of the 'Pro' qualification, but overall it is contextually 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?

The input schema already provides full description coverage for both parameters (model and action). The description reinforces the purpose but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

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 tool checks if a model is allowed to perform an action, serving as a permission verification before sensitive operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling agent tools like delimit_agent_complete and delimit_agent_dispatch by its specific purpose of checking permissions.

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 advises using the tool before executing sensitive operations, providing clear context. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for basic decision-making.

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