tenki_list_snapshots

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds a meaningful behavioral trait beyond them: the workspace owner is inferred from the API key, meaning no explicit owner parameter is needed. The description is consistent with the annotations and adds useful scoping context, though pagination behavior is left undisclosed.

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?

A single 13-word sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no wasted words. The parenthetical about API-key owner inference earns its place by clarifying scoping.

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 read-only list operation with rich annotations, the description conveys the core purpose and scoping adequately. However, it omits any mention of pagination despite the pagination parameters, and it fails to disambiguate against the sibling snapshot-listing tools, which is a significant completeness gap in this tool-dense 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%, so the description carries the burden of explaining the two parameters, but it never mentions page_size or page_token or the pagination mechanism they imply. The parameter names are conventional enough to hint at their purpose, but the description does nothing to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('saved snapshots') with clear workspace scoping, and adds a useful detail about owner inference from the API key. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the four snapshot-listing siblings (tenki_list_workspace_snapshots, tenki_list_session_snapshots, tenki_list_dangling_snapshots), so an agent cannot tell them apart from the description alone.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the sibling alternatives. Given that tenki_list_workspace_snapshots, tenki_list_session_snapshots, and tenki_list_dangling_snapshots all exist, the description's phrase 'for the workspace' creates ambiguity rather than resolving it, and no conditions or exclusions are provided.

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