delimit_ventures

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation (listing) and explains the auto-registration behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, or performance implications, which for a simple list tool is acceptable but leaves some ambiguity.

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 that efficiently convey purpose and mechanism. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema (not shown but present), the description sufficiently explains the resource and registration mechanism. It is complete for the agent to understand what this tool does and when to invoke it.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100%. According to guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds context about what ventures are but does not need to explain parameters.

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's purpose: listing all registered ventures/projects. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('ventures/projects'), and explains how ventures are registered. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delimit_context_list or delimit_ledger_list, which list different entities.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to view all ventures) and notes that ventures are auto-registered, which implies no manual setup. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, which would be beneficial but not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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