Lists every snapshot folder inside a given absolute path. Use this to identify available MT5 build snapshots for deployment or inspection.
List all snapshot folders under dest.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dest | Yes | Absolute path to the folder that holds snapshots. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Input schema / properties / dest / descriptionAdded value: +"Absolute path to the folder that holds snapshots."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "title": "list_snapshotsDictOutput",
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety and side-effect profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., return format, pagination, permissions), but does not contradict annotations. With annotations present, this is an adequate baseline.
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 zero filler. It states exactly what the tool does and the required location parameter. Every word earns its place.
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, one-parameter read-only listing operation with annotations covering safety and an output schema present, the description is fully sufficient. No additional information is needed for an agent to call this tool correctly.
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 100%: the parameter 'dest' is described as 'Absolute path to the folder that holds snapshots.' The tool description merely references dest without adding additional meaning, so it does not enhance beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies.
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 'List all snapshot folders under dest' clearly states a specific action (list) and resource (snapshot folders) with a location constraint. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from the sibling snapshot_sources (which likely creates snapshots) by its focus on listing.
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 when to use it (when you need to enumerate existing snapshot folders), but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The context is clear and the action is self-evident, so it meets the 'clear context, no exclusions' threshold.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.