delimit_diagnose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It explains that checks report PASS/FAIL/SKIP with fixes, but fails to disclose that the tool can also perform fixes (as indicated by 'dry_run' and 'undo' parameters). The description suggests it is only diagnostic, while parameters imply write capabilities, creating a gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise at two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the purpose, and the second provides details on the checks and output. No unnecessary words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers purpose, scope, and reporting format, but misses key behavioral details like whether the tool can perform fixes (given the 'dry_run' and 'undo' parameters). An output schema exists but its content isn't described. It is adequate for a basic understanding but lacks completeness for safe invocation.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema for the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides adequate information.

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 it is a comprehensive health check tool (delimit doctor) that runs 10 checks across various areas. It uses a specific verb ('diagnose') and resource ('install'). While there is a sibling 'delimit_repo_diagnose', the description does not explicitly differentiate, but the scope (installation vs repo) is implied.

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 positions it as a 'universal debugging tool' implying it should be used for troubleshooting. However, it does not specify when not to use it or provide alternatives (e.g., other diagnostic tools like delimit_repo_diagnose). No prerequisites or context for when to use vs other tools is given.

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