delimit_gov_status

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

No annotations provided, so description alone must disclose behavior. It explicitly states 'Side effects: read-only' and names the backend call. This is clear and useful, though it does not describe output format or pagination.

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 with front-loaded purpose, then clear usage sections, sibling contrast, and side effects. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema exists, description need not explain returns. It covers purpose, usage, side effects, and sibling differentiation completely for a simple 1-parameter tool.

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%; the input schema already defines the 'repo' parameter well. The description only reiterates 'for a given repo' without adding new semantics or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with 'Report governance state (open tasks, decisions) for a repo,' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling delimit_gov_health by stating that this tool reports per-repo workload, while health reports the engine.

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?

Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections with direct alternatives (delimit_gov_health, delimit_gov_evaluate). Also provides sibling contrast in a dedicated line.

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