Delimit Deliberation Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive; the description adds that it reads ~/.delimit state, exposes OAuth signed-in status, retains legacy fields, and notes the LED-2092 account requirement. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with clearly labeled When/When-not/Sibling contrast/Side effects/Returns sections. Although detailed, every section adds actionable context rather than filler.

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 zero-parameter, read-only status check with an output schema, the description covers invocation timing, return fields, legacy compatibility, and backend state. Nothing an agent needs to select and call it correctly is missing.

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?

There are zero parameters, so there is little to explain; the description explicitly states 'Args: None' and the schema confirms empty properties. This is the appropriate baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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?

Opens with 'Check deliberation usage and mode', a specific verb plus resource, and explicitly contrasts itself with delimit_deliberate and delimit_models. An agent can distinguish this from all siblings 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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' guidance (before delimit_deliberate to confirm quota/BYOK/OAuth state) and 'When NOT to use' with named alternatives. This is strong routing guidance that leaves no ambiguity about invocation context.

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