Delimit Init

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

Annotations are minimal, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly lists side effects: creates .delimit/policies.yml, ledger directory, chmod 755/600 changes, and optional .claude/settings.json writes. It also discloses that permission configuration can be skipped with no_permissions=True, giving the agent a complete picture of the tool's footprint.

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 'When to use', 'When NOT to use', and 'Side effects' sections, and the most important information is front-loaded. There is minor redundancy: the creation of .delimit/policies.yml and ledger directory appears in both the 'When to use' paragraph and the 'Side effects' section, but this is a small cost for the clarity gained.

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 three optional parameters and meaningful side effects, the description is complete: it names prerequisites, alternatives, exact filesystem effects, permission behavior, and how to opt out of the permission step. Because an output schema exists, no return-value explanation is required.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning by tying no_permissions to the permission step and to the optional .claude/settings.json allowlist, which goes slightly beyond the schema's short parameter description. Preset and project_path rely on the schema, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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: 'Initialize Delimit governance scaffolding for a project.' It also contrasts itself with delimit_project_config ('manages the config after init') and delimit_scan ('inspects what could be governed'), making it easy for an agent to distinguish this one-time initializer from nearby siblings.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit: 'When to use: once per project, the first time you adopt Delimit' and 'When NOT to use' names both the alternative tools and the conditions that route to them. This leaves no ambiguity about when the tool is the correct choice.

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