Get runtime snapshot

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with a read-only operation ('Return'). The description adds the scope (projects, services, deployments) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as the size of the snapshot, potential latency, or whether it returns raw vs. summarized data. With annotations covering safety, a mid-range score is appropriate.

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, focused sentence that states the purpose without any fluff. It front-loads the action and resource, earning a top score for economy.

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 zero-parameter, read-only snapshot tool, the description provides sufficient context: it names the three domains covered. However, without an output schema or more detail on return format, 'snapshot' remains mildly ambiguous, so it does not achieve a perfect score.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema has 100% coverage (trivially). The description needs to explain no parameter details, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no redundant parameter information.

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 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource: 'SuperDev-wide runtime snapshot' for projects, services, and deployments. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_services or list_projects by emphasizing the aggregate 'SuperDev-wide' scope.

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 this is a broad overview across multiple categories, but it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. listing individual resources. Sibling tools like list_projects and list_services offer more focused alternatives, yet no direct comparison or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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