Delimit Config Import

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses concrete side effects: writes the policy file under project_path, conditionally writes a GitHub Action workflow when write_workflow=True, and sanitizes project_path via _sanitize_path. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then organized into clearly labeled sections (When to use, When NOT to use, Sibling contrast, Side effects). Every sentence earns its place—no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 3-parameter mutation tool with a full output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, side effects, and path sanitization. There are no gaps an agent would need to resolve before invoking 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining behavioral consequences of write_workflow=True (writes workflow file if present in bundle) and clarifying that config_json is the output of a prior export from another project. These enrich parameter meaning beyond the schema, though the schema already does most of the work.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb (import), resource (governance config from a JSON bundle), and destination (into a project). The sibling contrast 'delimit_config_export produces; this consumes' further differentiates it from its closest counterpart, so an agent can distinguish it without inspecting schemas.

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 (apply a previously-exported bundle, round-trip counterpart to delimit_config_export) and when NOT to use (initialize a fresh project via delimit_init, or load existing config via delimit_project_config action="load"). Alternatives are named with conditions, leaving nothing to inference.

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