delimit_github_scan

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behaviors like read-only, required permissions, or rate limits. It only states the scan action without any side-effect or access information, leaving uncertainty about whether the tool is destructive or has authentication needs.

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 sentence without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. The inclusion of '(Pro)' is slightly distracting but does not harm conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks critical context such as what each cadence does, how results are formatted, and how it differs from similar tools like delimit_scan or delimit_repo_analyze. It is minimally adequate for a scanning tool with ambiguous parameter values.

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%, so the parameters are documented. However, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, and the cadence values ('pulse, hunter, deep') lack explanation of their semantic differences, which the description could have clarified.

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 identifies the verb 'Scan', the resource 'GitHub', and the specific purposes: adoption leads, competitive intel, and repo health. It distinguishes from siblings like delimit_reddit_scan or delimit_security_scan by explicitly targeting GitHub for these intel types.

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 such as delimit_repo_analyze or delimit_security_scan. The description does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or optimal use cases.

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