Delimit Spec Health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavior context: it notes the tool is read-only, calls backends.gateway_core.run_spec_health, and supports any valid OpenAPI 3.x or Swagger 2.0 spec, which goes 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 distinct sections for purpose, usage, exclusions, sibling contrast, and side effects. It is front-loaded with the core behavior and contains no redundant or filler content; every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage criteria, exclusions, alternatives, side effects, internal backend call, and supported spec versions. With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and call this 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 the schema already documents the single 'spec' parameter. The description adds meaning by defining what 'valid spec' means — OpenAPI 3.x or Swagger 2.0 — which helps clarify acceptable input values beyond the schema's 'Path to an OpenAPI spec file'.

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: 'Score an OpenAPI spec on quality dimensions (0-100, A-F grade).' It clearly distinguishes this tool from delimit_lint by explaining that delimit_lint compares two specs while this one scores a single spec on its own merits.

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 states when to use the tool ('quick spec quality checks during onboarding or review') and when NOT to use it, naming delimit_lint for breaking-change gates and delimit_diff for raw diffs. This gives an agent clear routing guidance among nearby siblings.

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