delimit_ledger_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It declares read-only, details internal calls (list_items, groom, P0 quota helpers), and comprehensively describes the return structure, including overall_health and next_actions.

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 well-structured with a succinct summary, usage guidelines, sibling contrast, and detailed return fields. It is somewhat lengthy but each sentence adds value. Slightly verbose but effective.

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 tool complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the return values comprehensively—totals, P0, stale, duplicates, garbage_venture, overall_health, and next_actions. It provides a complete picture for an AI agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context: venture auto-detects, stale_days and dup_min_count are thresholds passed to groom_proposal. This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'One-shot ledger health check — totals + P0 + stale + duplicates + garbage,' clearly specifying the verb and resource. It contrasts with sibling tools like delimit_ledger_groom and delimit_ledger_context, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance: use 'at session start (orchestrator session ritual) or nightly review' and not for changes (use delimit_ledger_bulk) or single item inspection (delimit_ledger_query). It also contrasts with sibling tools.

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