snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions creation and comparison but omits critical details like file overwriting (destructive behavior), required permissions, or the effect on .gas-snapshot files. The lack of transparency 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 extremely concise, consisting of two focused sentences with no redundant information. The core purpose and key usage hints are front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate for complete guidance. It covers the main function and two boolean parameters but leaves required 'projectPath' and other optional parameters unexplained beyond the schema.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning for 'diff' and 'check' parameters beyond the schema, but does not provide additional semantics for the required 'projectPath' or other optional filters. The added value is marginal.

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 creates or compares gas snapshots, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It hints at the command-line equivalent but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'gas_report' tool, though the context implies different functionality.

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 usage hints for the 'diff' and 'check' boolean parameters, but does not offer guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gas_report' or when not to use it. It leaves the user to infer usage context.

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