imgui_load_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses one important behavior: the current state is pushed to the undo stack before restoring. However, it doesn't disclose what happens if the named snapshot doesn't exist (error behavior), whether state is replaced entirely or merged, or if it's destructive to the current state being discarded beyond undo.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the first states the primary action and the second discloses the undo behavior. Zero filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the primary action and the undo push. But it omits error handling for unknown snapshot names and doesn't clarify how this interacts with the imgui_undo/redo stack, leaving behavioral ambiguity for an agent.

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%, with the single 'name' parameter clearly described as 'Name of the snapshot to restore.' The description reinforces the purpose of the name parameter but adds little beyond the schema. With full schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb-resource pair: 'Restore a previously saved snapshot by name.' This distinguishes it functionally from save/list/delete snapshot siblings. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from imgui_undo, which also restores state — creating some ambiguity between snapshot restore and undo operations.

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 (restoring snapshots) and mentions undo behavior, but doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it versus imgui_undo or imgui_redo. Given a large sibling set with related tools (imgui_save_snapshot, imgui_list_snapshots, imgui_undo), explicit alternatives would strengthen guidance.

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