create_snapshot

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states side effects: 'Creates a snapshot entry in the snapshot repository. This is a write operation that stores a compressed representation of current state.' This adequately informs the agent of the tool's write nature.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear one-sentence purpose, a usage guidance paragraph, and a side-effects paragraph. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or filler.

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 description is complete given the presence of an output schema and 100% schema coverage. It explains the tool's role in the system (fast resume) and references the related tool 'resume_project'. No additional context is needed.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what is already in the schema. It does not elaborate on 'force', 'limit', or 'include_derived' beyond their schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: 'Create a point-in-time snapshot of project state for fast resume.' It specifies the action (create) and the resource (snapshot). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'save_event' and 'resume_project'.

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 provides clear guidance: 'Use this to explicitly create a checkpoint before major operations or for backup purposes.' It also explains how to use the snapshot later with 'resume_project' and the use_snapshot parameter. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use advice but is sufficient.

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