icp_release_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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a record and its purpose, but does not disclose potential side effects such as whether it modifies the canister, requires specific permissions, or overwrites existing records. This is minimally adequate but 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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds rationale. There is no wasted wording, making it highly concise and well structured.

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 simple tool with four well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose and use case. It could be more explicit about what the 'record' contains or how it is stored, but the combination of schema and description is sufficiently complete.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-specific context beyond what the schema already provides, so no score above baseline is warranted.

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 ('Create') and resource ('release snapshot/record for a deployed canister'), and clearly states its purpose ('tracking deployments and enabling rollbacks'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like deploy, upgrade, and install_code, which perform different actions.

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 provides clear context: it is for a canister that is already deployed, and is useful for tracking deployments and rollbacks. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the situation in which to use it is well implied.

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