Delimit Release Status

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

The description provides rich behavioral context: licensing gate, unlicensed payload, no write/probe/notification, and internal invocation. However, it states 'read-only against the ops backend' while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, directly conflicting with the annotation; per rubric this is a 1.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and organized into scannable sections, and most content earns its place for a tool with many siblings. It is slightly long and includes some implementation detail like '_with_next_steps' that an agent does not need for selection, so 4 rather than 5.

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?

With one optional parameter, an output schema, and comprehensive sibling/alternative/exclusion guidance, the description covers everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. The contradictory readOnlyHint=false annotation versus the 'read-only' claim leaves the agent with conflicting safety signals, so it is not fully complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the only parameter, environment, is described with a default in the schema. The description reinforces environment-level scope but adds no new syntax, constraints, or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Report the active release version for a whole environment (Pro).' It clarifies the release-tier vs deploy-tier distinction and names the sibling tools it is not, so an agent can differentiate it from delimit_deploy_status and delimit_release_history without opening schemas.

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 has explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections. It names delimit_deploy_status, delimit_release_history, and delimit_release_plan as alternatives with the conditions that select them, and adds a sibling contrast paragraph.

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