bridge_snapshots

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. 'List existing backups' clearly indicates a read-only operation and 'newest-first' describes ordering, but no other behavioral details are provided, such as whether snapshots are returned individually or as a summary.

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 and front-loaded: it states the action (List), the resource (existing backups), and the ordering (newest-first). No unnecessary 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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention whether this is limited to bridge backups vs. other snapshot types, but the purpose and behavior are sufficiently clear.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter ambiguity. The description's mention of 'backups' and 'newest-first' adds meaning beyond the empty schema, clarifying what is being listed.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('existing backups'), with a clear ordering constraint ('newest-first'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bridge_snapshot (creating) and bridge_restore (restoring), so an agent can tell what this tool does without guessing.

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 the usage context: call this whenever you need to see existing backups, sorted newest-first. However, it does not explicitly compare to bridge_snapshot or bridge_restore, so there is no direct guidance on choosing this over related bridge tools.

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