delimit_build_loop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that failed stages don't block subsequent stages for the cycle type and outlines the basic behavior of each loop type. However, it lacks details on side effects, permissions, or potential destructive actions, leaving gaps in 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 concise and well-structured, using bullet points to clearly present loop types. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded. No redundant or irrelevant information.

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 complexity (four loop types, four parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which likely covers return values), the description provides a solid overview of functionality. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., session initialization) but is mostly complete for agent decision-making.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds value by explaining loop type semantics but does not elaborate on parameters like 'action', 'session_id', or 'cycle_mode' beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 executes a governed continuous loop, enumerates four specific loop types with brief explanations, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delimit_build_loop_daemon by emphasizing the loop types. The verb 'Execute' and resource 'governed continuous loop' provide a clear, specific purpose.

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 recommends specific loop types for different scenarios (e.g., 'cycle' for unified process, 'social' for social scanning) and provides guidance on when to use each. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives beyond the loop types themselves.

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