delimit_agent_status

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

States read-only nature and underlying function call. No annotations exist, so description carries the burden; it adequately covers safety but lacks detail on error conditions or rate limits. Still strong given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Very concise and well-structured: purpose sentence, usage sections, sibling contrast, side effects. Every sentence earns its place with zero 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional param, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, exclusions, side effects. Complete for its context.

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 repeats the schema's parameter description (task_id optional, empty for all) without adding new semantics. No enhancement over 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?

Clearly states 'Check status of dispatched agent tasks' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling delimit_agent_dashboard by contrasting raw status records vs aggregate view.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use (monitor open/closed tasks) and when NOT to use (dispatch or complete tasks), naming specific sibling tools as alternatives. The sibling contrast further clarifies differentiation.

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