keepa_take_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool stores state and compares to a previous snapshot, which is useful. However, it omits side effects (e.g., whether the previous snapshot is overwritten), permissions required, or behavior when no previous snapshot exists. For a state-changing tool, this is a significant gap.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and key return behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 moderate complexity (stateful snapshot, comparison) and lack of output schema, the description provides a general sense of return value ('detected changes') but omits the return format and edge cases (e.g., first snapshot, no tracked ASINs). It is adequate but leaves room for clarification.

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 no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The phrase 'for tracked ASINs' mirrors the schema's default value description for the 'asins' parameter, so no additional value is added.

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's action: 'Fetch and store a snapshot for tracked ASINs.' This distinguishes it from siblings like keepa_get_product (which reads current data) and keepa_get_changes (which may only retrieve changes without storing a snapshot). The verb+resource combination is 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 implies usage for tracked ASINs and says it returns changes vs the previous snapshot, giving context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over keepa_get_changes or other siblings, nor mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond 'tracked.' The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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