Delimit Context Branch

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

Despite sparse annotations, the description discloses per-action side effects: 'list' is read-only, 'create' writes a new branch namespace, and 'merge' mutates the main namespace and closes the branch. It also explicitly states what the tool does NOT touch: code repository, git state, license gate, notification, or ledger. This goes well beyond the annotation fields and gives the agent a reliable behavioral model.

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 organized with clear sections and front-loaded purpose. There is minor redundancy between the 'When NOT to use' section and the 'Sibling contrast' section, both covering delimit_context_snapshot, but overall every section earns its place and no filler exists.

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's multi-action complexity and mutable-vs-immutable semantics, the description is thorough. It covers when to use it, when not to use it, side effects, exclusions, and the filesystem target. The output schema is present, so return-value detail is not required here.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful semantic context by explaining what each action means ('list' inventories branches, 'create' mints a new branch, 'merge' folds a branch back into main), which enriches the action parameter meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Manage mutable working branches of a venture's context.' It immediately distinguishes itself from related tools like delimit_context_snapshot and delimit_context_read, and from git branch operations. An agent can clearly identify what this tool does and what it does not do.

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 an explicit 'When to use' section with a concrete scenario ('what if we pivoted?'), a 'When NOT to use' section naming alternative tools, and a sibling contrast section. This is exemplary routing guidance that leaves little to inference.

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