list_snapshots_container

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' clearly implies a read-only operation, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose additional relevant behaviors such as authentication requirements, behavior when no snapshots exist, or whether the response is paginated. It meets the minimum but lacks depth.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key verb and resource. There is no redundant wording or filler, making it highly efficient.

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's low complexity (2 simple parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently scopes the operation and indicates the returned entities (snapshots). It lacks details on response format or any special considerations, but for a listing operation this is well-covered.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the 'node' or 'vmid' parameters. However, the parameter names are self-explanatory in the Proxmox context (node is a cluster node, vmid is the container ID) and the description clarifies that the target is an LXC container. This is adequate but leaves some ambiguity for non-experts.

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 ('List all snapshots') and the resource ('LXC container'), which is specific and distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'list_snapshots_vm' for VMs. The verb is precise and the scope is unambiguous.

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 implies usage by naming the resource type, and the sibling tools include snapshot operations for containers, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it, so it falls short of the highest bar.

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