delimit_daemon_classify

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the tool classifies and suggests, without revealing whether it is a read-only operation, whether it mutates state, or what side effects it has. The description adds minimal value beyond the tool name.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to read. However, it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

Although an output schema exists, its content is not visible, and the description does not elaborate on the output structure or behavior. The tool returns 'risk tier and suggested automation tool,' but no details are provided about the format, possible values, or how the classification is determined. The description is too sparse for a classification tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the parameter semantics are adequately documented in the schema itself. The tool description does not add any additional insight beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 action ('classify') and the object ('ledger item's risk tier and suggested automation tool'). It is specific enough to understand the tool's core function, but it does not differentiate it from sibling tools like delimit_ledger_query or delimit_daemon_run, which could also involve classification or automation decisions.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where this classification is appropriate. The description is purely declarative without contextual advice.

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