snapshot_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It labels the tool as '[WRITE]' indicating mutation, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, or limits (e.g., snapshot naming rules, quota impacts). More detail would improve transparency.

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 extremely concise, with a clear purpose statement and bullet-point arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the core action, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

Considering no output schema and three parameters, the description adequately covers purpose, argument format with examples, and inverse relationship. However, it omits information on return values, error handling, or prerequisites, leaving minor gaps for a complete understanding.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description adds critical meaning through examples for each parameter (e.g., dataset='tank/data', name='manual-2026-06-28'). This compensates for the schema's lack of documentation, providing concrete usage context.

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 'Create a ZFS snapshot' with the specific format 'dataset@name', directly indicating the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like snapshot_delete and snapshot_list by emphasizing creation and mentioning the inverse operation.

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 argument examples but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'Inverse: snapshot_delete' hints at usage context but does not specify conditions or exclusions.

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