delimit_config_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only ('read-only on the project'), sanitizes the project path via _sanitize_path, and returns the bundle in response without writing to a file. While it could mention error handling or additional side effects, it provides key behavioral traits.

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 well-structured with clear sections, concise sentences, and no redundancy. Every sentence adds value, and the main purpose is front-loaded. It achieves maximum efficiency in communication.

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 has one parameter, good schema coverage, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, side effects, and return behavior. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 sole parameter, project_path, is well-described in the schema with a default and explanation. Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. No further elaboration is given, so baseline score of 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's purpose: 'Export the current governance config as a shareable JSON bundle.' It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly naming delimit_config_import as the round-trip counterpart and delimit_gov_policy for reading live policy, providing clear differentiation.

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 includes dedicated 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, giving explicit scenarios: use for packaging config for sharing/import, not for reading live policy or initializing a project. It also contrasts with sibling tools, providing comprehensive usage guidance.

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