delimit_vendor_news_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully covers behavioral aspects: it declares read-only nature and enumerates internal operations (greps crontab, reads log files, etc.), ensuring the agent understands side effects.

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 clear sections (general description, when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, side effects, args, returns) and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description provides complete context: it explains the tool's scope, side effects, and return fields (cron_installed, last_run_ts, etc.) with no gaps.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description explicitly states 'Args: None.' which is clear and helpful.

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 states the tool is a health check for the vendor-news riff system, specifying exactly what it checks (cron firing, drafts landing, rejections) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delimit_vendor_news_draft and delimit_social_daemon.

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 provides 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections with concrete examples, and contrasts with sibling tools, giving clear guidance on tool selection.

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