refine_game_snapshot_capture

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not reveal whether the tool mutates state, requires specific conditions (e.g., an existing snapshot), or what side effects occur. The phrase 'prepare a follow-up capture' hints at an action, but its effects are opaque. This is a significant transparency gap.

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, concise sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words. It effectively packs two related actions (finding paths and preparing a capture) into a compact format.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with this level of complexity. It does not explain what 'node-limited paths' means, what the 'latest bridge snapshot' refers to, or how the follow-up capture relates to the overall snapshot workflow. Given the sibling tools, there is implied context, but the description alone leaves significant gaps for an agent to make correct invocation decisions.

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 schema has one parameter, max_targets, with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all. While the name 'max_targets' and the phrase 'node-limited paths' loosely imply a limit on the number of targets, the description fails to explicitly define the parameter's meaning, default, or allowed values. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 clearly states a specific action: 'Find node-limited paths in the latest bridge snapshot and prepare a deep, targeted follow-up capture.' It uses a specific verb ('find', 'prepare') and resource ('bridge snapshot', 'follow-up capture'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like prepare_game_snapshot_capture (initial preparation) and inspect_game_snapshot (inspection).

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 a workflow (refine after initial capture) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks any mention of exclusions or direct comparison to siblings like prepare_game_snapshot_capture. The usage context is only implied, not explicit.

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