mujoco_get_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: values are unrounded, internal counters and guard status are included, and the snapshot must be taken while paused. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: the first front-loads scope, the second enumerates contents, and the last two give capture/storage guidance. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

The output schema covers return shape, the annotations cover safety, and the description covers content, precision, and the need to pause. For a one-parameter snapshot tool, this is enough for an agent to invoke it correctly without missing critical context.

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%, and the description never mentions session_id or explains how to obtain it. With low coverage, the description was expected to compensate for the parameter semantics, and it does not. The single self-explanatory 'Session Id' property limits the practical harm, but the gap remains.

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 names a precise verb and resource: 'Get unrounded mjSTATE_INTEGRATION plus step/noise counters and guard status.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_state-like tools by saying the snapshot goes 'beyond qpos/qvel.' An agent can tell exactly what this tool returns without opening the output schema.

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 gives clear capture context: persist the JSON and pause before capture, which tells an agent when snapshotting is valid. It does not explicitly name alternatives like mujoco_get_state or mujoco_restore_snapshot, so the when-not-to-use guidance is mostly implied rather than stated.

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