List Parallels snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the no-side-effect behavior was already known. The description reinforces that trait but does not add new behavioral context such as ordering, error conditions, or permissions.

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 one efficient sentence with no filler. The core action, resource, and read-only scope are front-loaded.

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 list operation with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the essential use. It only falls short on parameter semantics, which is a minor gap here.

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 only parameter, vm, gets no semantic detail beyond its name and string type. The description says 'for a VM' but does not clarify whether vm takes a name, UUID, or path, so it does not 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List snapshots for a VM'. It also distinguishes itself from the mutating sibling tools (snapshot_create, snapshot_revert, snapshot_delete) by noting it does so 'without changing state'.

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 phrase 'without changing state' implies this is the inspection tool and not for mutation, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of snapshot_create/revert/delete as alternatives. The intended context is clear but left to inference.

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