describe_snapshots
Get a list of available snapshots for a specified Lighthouse instance by providing region and instance ID.
Instructions
查询实例的快照列表
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | Yes | 地域 | |
| instanceId | Yes | 实例 ID |
Get a list of available snapshots for a specified Lighthouse instance by providing region and instance ID.
查询实例的快照列表
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | Yes | 地域 | |
| instanceId | Yes | 实例 ID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the basic purpose without any details on permissions, limits, or side effects.
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, front-loaded, and wastes no words. However, it is extremely brief, which limits usefulness.
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 has only two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details about return format, pagination, or snapshot statuses.
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% with clear parameter descriptions for region and instanceId. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.
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 verb (查询/query) and specific resource (实例的快照列表/snapshot list of instance), distinguishing it from siblings like describe_instances and describe_firewall_rules.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as filtering by snapshot attributes or using other describe tools. No exclusions or context provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/BlueBridge-E/lighthouse-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server