Delimit Sense

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which are coarse. The description adds crucial per-action side effects: 'promote' writes a ledger item, 'freeze' cold-archives a month, and 'query', 'digest', 'show', 'status' are read-only. It also names the storage path, giving the agent a realistic behavioral model beyond 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 well-structured with labeled sections and front-loaded purpose. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary because 'Sibling contrast' partially repeats the 'When NOT to use' content, but every section contributes useful decision and side-effect 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?

For a multi-action tool with eight optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the corpus boundary, when to use it, when not to use it, alternatives, side effects, and read-only vs write actions. Combined with the fully documented schema, nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a clear description with defaults and allowed values. The tool description doesn't add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'review and manage the signal corpus (LED-877).' It clearly distinguishes this tool from platform sensors and ledger write tools by naming them directly, so an agent can tell it apart from delimit_reddit_scan, delimit_github_scan, and delimit_ledger_add.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' guidance, names the exact alternative tools for each excluded case, and adds a sibling contrast sentence that captures the boundary: sensors capture; this manages. An agent has clear decision criteria for selecting 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.