Delimit Config Export

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

The description states 'Side effects: read-only on the project' and 'no file write,' but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false. These directly contradict each other: one says the operation is read-only, the other says it is not. Per the rubric, this contradiction forces a score of 1.

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 short labeled sections: purpose, when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, and side effects. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information 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?

For a simple one-optional-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, exclusions, alternatives, side effects, and response behavior. It is nearly complete, but the direct contradiction between the stated read-only behavior and readOnlyHint=false prevents full marks.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful parameter-related context by stating that project_path is sanitized via _sanitize_path, which is not present in the input schema. This exceeds the baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Export the current governance config as a shareable JSON bundle.' It clearly identifies the output format and distinguishes this tool from its round-trip counterpart, delimit_config_import, making sibling differentiation immediate and clear.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('to package a project's delimit.yml + GitHub Action workflow'), when NOT to use it, and names the alternatives (delimit_gov_policy and delimit_init). This is ideal routing guidance for an agent.

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