delimit_context_read

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only implies a non-destructive read via the verb 'Read,' but offers no details on side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior, which is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it sacrifices necessary detail. While not verbose, it is overly minimal and does not earn its place by adding sufficient value beyond the name.

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?

Despite the output schema existing, the description fails to distinguish this tool from many sibling context tools (e.g., delimit_context_list, delimit_context_snapshot). The parameter semantics are unexplained, and the tool's role in the system is unclear, making it incomplete 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no descriptions for the two required parameters (venture and name). The description does not add any meaning to these parameters, leaving an agent to guess their semantics.

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 states 'Read an artifact from the context filesystem,' clearly indicating the action (Read) and resource (artifact from context filesystem). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delimit_context_write and delimit_context_list. However, it does not specify what constitutes an 'artifact,' limiting clarity slightly.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delimit_context_list or delimit_context_snapshot. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or other context that would help an agent decide.

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