delimit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool marks datasets as immutable and prevents modifications, which implies a write operation with permanent effects. However, it lacks details on permissions required, whether the action is reversible, error handling, or rate limits—critical for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise Args section. It avoids unnecessary details, but the structure could be slightly improved by integrating the parameter note more seamlessly rather than as a separate block.

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 an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values) but no annotations and low schema coverage, the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic action and parameter but misses behavioral context like side effects or usage scenarios, making it adequate but with clear 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description adds a brief explanation for 'dataset_id' as 'Dataset identifier,' which offers basic semantics but doesn't clarify format, constraints, or examples. This partially compensates but leaves gaps, aligning with the baseline for minimal param info.

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 with a specific verb ('Mark') and resource ('dataset'), explaining it makes datasets immutable and prevents modifications. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delimit_intel_dataset_register' or 'delimit_intel_dataset_list', which would require a 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions preventing modifications but doesn't specify prerequisites, irreversible consequences, or when to choose this over other dataset-related tools like 'delimit_intel_dataset_register'.

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