delimit_task_complete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions side effects (records completion, updates session metrics), which is helpful. However, it does not disclose auth requirements, rate limits, or error handling beyond the error parameter in the schema. Acceptable but not thorough.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence adds value. No redundancy or filler. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 existence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's role in a workflow loop. It explains the input parameters (via schema) and the return behavior (next task or STOP). Minor gap: does not describe the output shape explicitly, but output schema compensates.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the overall function. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'mark current task done and get the next one' and the resource 'task', distinguishing it from siblings like delimit_next_task (only get next) and delimit_ledger_done (only mark done). The context of a loop is explicit.

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 implies usage within a loop ('The loop continues until a STOP signal') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided, leaving the agent to infer context from the sibling list.

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