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

The description discloses key behavioral traits beyond annotations: snapshots are immutable, owner-private, never span accounts, and require tickets:read scope. It also states the return payload matches the web app's snapshot list. Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) are consistent, and the description adds valuable context.

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 concise and well-structured: it front-loads the purpose, then adds context on immutability, fields, privacy, and auth. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is appropriately brief for a simple list tool.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter), the description is complete. It covers what snapshots are, their ordering, fields, privacy constraints, authentication requirements, and the return payload consistency. The presence of an output schema further reduces the need to detail return formats.

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?

The single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema (description, default, min, max), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, though it does note the ordering ('newest first') which indirectly relates to the parameter's effect.

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 clearly states the tool lists the user's own portfolio snapshots, newest first, and explains what they are (immutable rollups). It distinguishes from get_portfolio_snapshot and diff_portfolio_snapshots by context, though not explicitly naming them. The verb 'list' and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 clearly indicates it is for listing one's own snapshots and emphasizes owner-privacy and account scoping. It mentions authentication and scope requirements but does not explicitly contrast with get_portfolio_snapshot or diff_portfolio_snapshots, though the purpose is clear enough for typical use.

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