delimit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the backup action and destination but lacks critical details: whether this overwrites existing backups, requires specific permissions, handles errors, or provides confirmation output. For a tool that modifies filesystem state, this is insufficient 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 appropriately concise with two sentences: one stating the purpose and one explaining the parameter. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 1 parameter with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description provides minimal but functional context. It states what the tool does and the parameter's role. However, for a backup operation that likely has side effects, more behavioral details would be helpful. The existence of an output schema (not shown) means return values might be documented elsewhere, keeping this adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description adds basic semantics: 'target: Directory or file to back up.' This clarifies the parameter's purpose but doesn't specify format constraints, valid paths, or what happens with the default value '.'. It partially compensates but leaves gaps.

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: 'Back up SQLite and JSON data files to ~/.delimit/backups/ with timestamp.' It specifies the action (back up), resources (SQLite and JSON data files), and destination. It distinguishes from siblings like delimit_data_migrate or delimit_vault_snapshot by focusing on local backup operations. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these alternatives, preventing a score of 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the target parameter but doesn't explain prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or when other tools like delimit_data_migrate or delimit_vault_snapshot might be better suited. This leaves the agent without usage direction.

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