Delimit Version

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and idempotent, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it counts registered tools, detects API keys/CLIs/security tools, and reports environment-detection results. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent anticipate side effects and capabilities without manual configuration.

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 and front-loaded: purpose, usage, exclusions, sibling contrast, side effects, args, and returns. Every section earns its place and contributes directly to correct invocation, 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?

For a no-argument read-only tool with a returned dict described at a high level and an output schema present, the description is complete. It covers when to use it, when not to, what it reports, and its side-effect profile. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call it appropriately.

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 zero parameters, so the empty input schema is self-explanatory. The description explicitly states 'Args: None' and clarifies what the tool returns, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool. Baseline 4 is appropriate since there is nothing more to add about 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Return Delimit server version, tool count, and environment status.' It distinguishes itself from delimit_help, delimit_gov_health, and delimit_os_status by scope, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 gives explicit 'When to use' guidance for session start, dashboards, and diagnostics. It also provides 'When NOT to use' exclusions with named alternatives, which is exactly the level of routing clarity an agent needs.

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