delimit_test_generate

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 the parsing methods (AST vs regex) and that it extracts public function signatures. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., file overwriting) or behavioral traits like required permissions or output format beyond 'skeletons'. Moderate transparency.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no superfluous content. The first sentence front-loads the primary purpose, and the second provides essential method detail. Every word 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?

Given an output schema exists (context signal), explaining return values is unnecessary. The description covers the tool's core function and method. It could briefly mention that it respects parameters like 'framework' or 'source_files', but schema already does that. Slightly incomplete for an AI agent needing to understand full scope.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for its 3 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, such as explaining how 'source_files' interacts with the scanning or how 'framework' influences output. No added value beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool generates test skeletons for source code, explains the scanning methods (AST for Python, regex for JS/TS), and extracts public function signatures. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like delimit_test_coverage or delimit_test_smoke.

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 for generating test skeletons from source files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or comparison with siblings like delimit_generate_scaffold or delimit_test_smoke, leaving some ambiguity for an AI agent.

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