Delimit Context Snapshot

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by disclosing that the tool 'writes a snapshot record under the venture namespace via ai.context_fs' and that the snapshot is 'immutable.' This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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-structured with clear labeled sections: when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, and side effects. Every section adds distinct value and the opening line is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words.

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, usage context, exclusions, alternatives, side effects, and storage behavior. An output schema is present, so return-value documentation is not needed. For a tool with this complexity, the description is complete and actionable.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond schema, but given full coverage, no extra compensation is needed. This meets the baseline for schema-heavy parameter documentation.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Capture a point-in-time snapshot of a venture's context.' It also differentiates itself from sibling tools by explicitly contrasting with delimit_context_branch, which creates a divergent line of work. This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinguishable.

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 explicit 'When to use' guidance (before a risky model handoff, doctrine edit, or refactor) and explicit 'When NOT to use' guidance with named alternatives (delimit_context_write, delimit_memory_store). It also adds a sibling contrast with delimit_context_branch. This is exemplary routing information.

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