Delimit Design Component Library

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

Description explicitly discloses side effects: 'read-only scan' and 'Writes nothing.' Since readOnlyHint is false, this goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent concrete safety information that the structured metadata does not provide.

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?

Every section earns its place: purpose, when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, and side effects. The structure is scannable and free of filler.

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 only two simple parameters, a present output schema, and clear side-effect disclosure, the description is fully complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. No critical context is missing.

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 fully documents project_path and output_format. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but none is needed; 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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Scan a project for React/Vue/Svelte components and emit a catalog.' It clearly differentiates from sibling tools by stating it lists existing components rather than generating new ones.

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?

Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections name the alternative tools delimit_design_generate_component and delimit_story_generate. The sibling contrast sentence reinforces the selection boundary, leaving no ambiguity.

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