get_snippet

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'get' implies a read-only retrieval and 'code snippet' suggests the return value, which provides basic transparency. However, it does not disclose whether this pulls from local resources, requires network access, or has any notable limitations.

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, front-loaded with the action and object, and contains no filler or redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is mostly sufficient: it names the output type and the category domain. Still, with no output schema and no usage guidance, the description leaves return format and selection criteria implicit, so the agent must infer some details.

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 already provides 100% coverage of the single 'category' parameter with an enum of values and a description. The description adds loose examples like MySQL and Login that map to the enum values, but it does not meaningfully expand parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action and resource: getting a common SAMP code snippet. It gives example content areas like MySQL and Login, which helps an agent understand the tool's scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from similar snippet-generation siblings like generate_boilerplate or get_essential_libraries.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as generate_boilerplate, get_coding_standards, or search_samp_resources. The description provides no context about use cases, exclusions, or when another tool would be more appropriate.

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