delimit_prompt_drift

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses side effects for different actions: 'record' writes to a store, while 'check' and 'rank' are read-only. This adds important behavioral context beyond the schema, though it does not cover error conditions or permissions.

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 concise and well-structured, with distinct sections for purpose, usage guidelines, sibling contrast, and side effects. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 (6 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, side effects, and sibling comparison. The output schema likely documents return values, so the description is adequate and complete for an agent to understand and use the tool correctly.

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 minimal parameter-level detail beyond the schema, but does mention that 'model' is required for the 'record' action, which is a nuance not captured in the schema's required field (none). This adds marginal value.

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 detects prompt drift across models for the same task. It uses the specific verb 'Detect' and resource 'prompt drift', and distinguishes from the sibling tool delimit_deliberate by noting it tracks single-model behaviour rather than cross-model deliberation.

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 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, including a specific alternative tool (delimit_deliberate) and a sibling contrast that clarifies the difference. This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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