delimit_diff_report

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

No annotations provided. Description covers pipeline steps and output formats but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether output is returned or saved), permissions, or rate limits.

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?

Very concise: 4 sentences covering purpose, pipeline, output format, and usage scenario. No wasted words.

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 high schema coverage and existence of output schema, description is quite complete. Covers main features and use cases. Title is null but description compensates.

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%. Description adds context beyond schema by explaining output_format options, optional output file, and optional policy file. Provides good additional meaning.

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 it generates a shareable API diff report with full analysis, listing specific pipeline steps. Distinguishes from sibling 'delimit_diff' which likely performs only the raw diff.

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?

Explicitly says when to use ('shareable artifact for API review, PR comments, or compliance records'). Does not explicitly mention alternatives but implies the comprehensive nature.

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