inspect_game_snapshot

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

The description discloses that results are bounded and include truncation markers, adding behavioral context beyond the schema. However, with no annotations, it does not explicitly state read-only status, side effects, or the meaning of the query parameter. The verb 'Return' weakly implies read-only.

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 no filler. It efficiently communicates the core action and output contents.

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 tool has an output schema, so the return structure is likely defined elsewhere, and the description lists the main columns. However, the absence of parameter semantics and usage guidance leaves notable gaps, particularly around the 'query' parameter, making the description only minimally complete.

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 description does not explain either parameter. The phrase 'bounded table' only hints at max_entries limiting size, but the 'query' parameter is completely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the lack of 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 ('Return') and a clear resource ('bridge snapshot paths, types, list sizes, and truncation markers'), and the phrase 'bounded table' hints at a distinctive behavior. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_game_snapshot_path_profiles or read_game_snapshot.

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 tool is for browsing or inspecting a collection of snapshot paths with metadata, especially when results may need bounding. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions.

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