delimit_daemon_run

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'autonomous daemon' and '(Pro)', hinting at licensing. The schema provides some behavioral details (e.g., dry_run logs without executing, 0 iterations = infinite), but the description does not elaborate on side effects, async behavior, or how to stop an infinite loop.

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 very concise at one sentence, no fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it may be too brief to convey essential behavioral context.

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 complexities (daemon, possible infinite loop, Pro feature), the description lacks crucial context such as how to stop the daemon, what the output schema contains, and prerequisites. It is insufficient for an agent to use effectively without additional exploration.

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% and both parameters have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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?

Description clearly states 'Run the autonomous daemon' (verb+resource) and references the key parameter 'N iterations'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like delimit_build_loop_daemon or delimit_daemon_classify.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no when-not-to-use conditions. The description is purely declarative without any usage context.

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