delimit_handoff_create

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 the tool creates a record documenting completed, incomplete, and next steps, and notes the Pro tier requirement. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or the format of the created receipt. This is adequate but not detailed.

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 three sentences long, front-loading the purpose in the first sentence. Each sentence adds value: purpose, content, and a workflow note. No redundant information.

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 complexity (11 optional parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides a high-level overview but lacks details on best practices, the structure of the receipt, or how to retrieve it later. It is complete enough for basic use but could be enhanced with references to sibling tools like delimit_handoff_list.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds minimal value by summarizing the kind of information documented (completed, not completed, next action) but does not elaborate on specific parameters or their usage beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score applies.

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 the tool creates a handoff receipt for transitioning between agents/sessions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delimit_handoff_acknowledge (which acknowledges handoffs) and delimit_session_handoff (which may handle the actual handoff flow). The mention of 'Pro' adds context.

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 indicates when to use the tool: during agent/session transitions. It also advises that the receiving agent should acknowledge before starting work, implying a workflow order. While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, the context is clear and provides practical guidance.

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