Delimit Help

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond these: it states 'Side effects: read-only' and reveals the implementation detail 'Looks up an in-memory help table.' This gives the agent confidence about safety and internal behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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 tightly structured with clear labeled sections (When to use, When NOT to use, Sibling contrast, Side effects) and no filler. Every sentence contributes either usage guidance or behavioral context, and the most important purpose statement 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?

For a simple, read-only help tool with one optional parameter and a proper output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage boundaries, sibling differentiation, side effects, and parameter behavior, so an agent can safely and correctly invoke it without further research.

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%: the single optional parameter tool_name is already documented in the schema, including that empty returns the workflows overview. The tool description itself does not add much parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get help for a Delimit tool — purpose, parameters, examples.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it 'returns per-tool descriptions from the TOOL_HELP table,' making its scope clear against the many delimit_* tools.

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 explicitly provides 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' conditions, and names the alternative tools (delimit_version, delimit_gov_health) for those excluded cases. The sibling contrast line further clarifies the boundary by contrasting the returned content.

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