delimit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves status information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time or cached data, or details about the 'Pro' tier implications. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic purpose.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get current Delimit OS status') and adds specific details ('with plan/task/token counts (Pro)'). There's no wasted wording, and every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 that the tool has 0 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain inputs or return values. However, it's a status-checking tool with no annotations, and the description lacks behavioral details like authentication needs or data freshness. The mention of '(Pro)' hints at complexity but isn't fully explained, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 0 parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, but it does mention what data is returned ('plan/task/token counts'), which adds value beyond the schema. Since there are no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description provides useful output context.

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: 'Get current Delimit OS status with plan/task/token counts (Pro).' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('Delimit OS status'), and what information is returned ('plan/task/token counts'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delimit_os_plan' or 'delimit_os_gates', which likely serve related but distinct purposes.

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 '(Pro)' which might imply a feature tier, but doesn't clarify prerequisites, timing, or comparisons to siblings such as 'delimit_gov_status' or 'delimit_obs_status'. There's no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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