st.snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates the tool writes a filesystem snapshot, but does not disclose where snapshots are stored, whether existing snapshots are overwritten, what permissions are needed, or how to use the snapshot afterward.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and easy to parse, though it achieves this by omitting important context.

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 tool has no annotations and no output schema, yet the description does not explain the meaning of the optional 'label', the snapshot storage location, or what the tool returns. An agent has enough to guess the core action, but not enough to invoke it with confidence.

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 the 'label' parameter. An agent cannot infer whether the label is a snapshot name, a tag, or some other identifier.

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 states a specific action ('Create a filesystem snapshot') and identifies the resources covered ('ST config, user data, extension, and plugin paths'). It is clear enough to distinguish st.snapshot from most siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast it with related tools like st.rollback or st.config_locations.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a backup purpose, but never says when a snapshot is appropriate, when it isn't, or which sibling tool should be used instead.

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