Delimit Agent Policy

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

Discloses the conditional write side effect: providing any of ledger/memory/deploy/evidence/secrets/custom_constraints writes via ai.agent_policy.set_agent_policy, while empty/no-changes is read-only. This goes well beyond the readOnlyHint: false annotation and gives the agent a precise mental model of when state changes occur.

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?

Organized with labeled sections for purpose, usage, side effects, and value formats. Every sentence contributes meaningful selection or invocation guidance, and the most decision-relevant content 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?

The description covers purpose, alternatives, side effects, allowed values, and write-versus-read behavior. With an output schema present, no return-format detail is needed; the description fully equips an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by enumerating allowed access levels ('read-only', 'read-write', 'none') and boolean flags for deploy/secrets. It also provides a concrete custom_constraints example, compensating for the absence of enums in the schema.

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?

Opens with a clear verb-resource statement: 'Set or view per-model governance permissions.' It then names the exact resources governed (ledger, memory, evidence, deploy, secrets) and contrasts itself with delimit_gov_evaluate, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' guidance, naming delimit_gov_evaluate for runtime evaluation and delimit_project_config for session policy. The sibling contrast further clarifies that this tool configures the policy those evaluations consume.

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