snapshot_list

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description goes further by disclosing the return envelope and, importantly, that 'truncated is true' means more snapshots exist than were returned — a non-obvious behavioral trait. It does not cover ordering, rate limits, or permission requirements, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the return shape, then a compact Args block — no filler sentences. The return-shape line earns its place because no output schema exists, though it slightly interrupts the purpose-to-parameters flow.

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 no output schema, the description supplies exactly what is missing: the response envelope keys and the meaning of the truncated flag, plus documentation for all three otherwise-undocumented parameters. Nothing an agent needs to invoke and interpret this tool correctly is absent.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does document all three parameters: vm_id as an optional VM uuid filter, limit as a post-filter cap with default 200, and target as a config-derived Xen Orchestra name where omission selects the default. The 'after filtering' qualifier on limit is meaningful semantics the schema does not express.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List VM snapshots') plus its scope ('optionally filtered to one VM'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling mutation tools snapshot_create, snapshot_delete and snapshot_revert. An agent can identify the read/list tool without opening any schema.

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 '[READ]' prefix and 'optionally filtered to one VM' establish when to reach for this tool, and '(see vm_list)' routes the agent to the sibling needed to obtain a vm_id. There is no explicit statement of when NOT to use it (e.g. versus a single-snapshot fetch), so it falls short of a full 5.

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