Delimit Context Write

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by disclosing the side effect: the artifact is written under the venture namespace via ai.context_fs, with file creation under ~/.delimit/context/<venture>/. It does not address overwrite behavior on an existing artifact name, but it provides solid transparency beyond the annotations.

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 sections: primary purpose, when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, and side effects. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

For a tool with 4 well-documented parameters and an output schema, the description covers selection criteria, exclusions, sibling differentiation, and side effects. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to decide when to invoke it and what to expect.

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 all four parameters. The description adds usage context like persisting plans, decision records, or code artifacts, but it does not add significant parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Write an artifact to a venture's context filesystem (STR-048).' It distinguishes itself from the closest siblings by stating that delimit_context_read fetches one artifact, delimit_context_list inventories the venture, and this one writes one. The scope and intent are unmistakable.

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 explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' guidance, naming delimit_memory_store for ephemeral context and delimit_context_snapshot for snapshotting all artifacts. It also adds a sibling contrast for read and list, making the selection criteria clear.

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