delimit_ledger_propose

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Explicitly declares side effects: 'read-only analysis (does NOT auto-create ledger items)', making the non-mutating behavior clear.

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?

Well-structured with separate sections for purpose, when to use/not use, sibling contrast, and side effects. Every sentence is informative and no 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 an output schema exists, description covers when to use, side effects, and differentiators. Could be more specific about what 'signals, completed work, and gaps' means, but otherwise complete.

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. Description mentions 'suggest 3-5 next items' which loosely aligns with max_items default, but adds no additional semantic detail 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?

Clearly states verb ('Propose'), resource ('new ledger items'), and context ('based on signals, completed work, and gaps'). Distinguishes from sibling delimit_ledger_add by noting that this proposes while the sibling commits.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('at the end of a build loop or when the queue is empty') and when NOT to use ('to add a known item' or 'list current items'), with clear sibling alternatives named.

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