snapshot_get_area_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool returns a 'full snapshot' combining states, devices, and entities, but does not detail the output structure, pagination, or performance implications. The presence of an output schema mitigates some burden, but the description lacks depth.

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 immediately conveys the tool's purpose and convenience. It is front-loaded with 'Convenience' and uses concise, jargon-free language. No extraneous words.

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 an output schema, return value explanation is not necessary. However, the description does not clarify that the tool aggregates multiple queries (e.g., area states, area devices, area entities) or note any dependencies. The summary parameter is undocumented. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 should compensate. It mentions area_id implicitly ('scoped to one area') but does not explain the 'summary' parameter (boolean, default true). The purpose of summary is unclear from the description alone, leaving the agent guessing.

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 explicitly states it provides a 'full snapshot scoped to one area (states + devices + entities)'. The verb 'get' is implied by context, and the resource is clearly the area snapshot. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'snapshot_get_snapshot' (no area scope) and individual area tools.

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 labels it as a 'convenience' tool, implying it simplifies fetching multiple data types for one area. It implicitly suggests using this instead of separate calls to areas_get_area_states, areas_list_devices, etc. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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