snapshot_list_proposalsList Snapshot DAO proposals newest first, defaulting to active voting items, so AI agents can discover governance proposals to review or vote on.
Lists proposals in a Snapshot space, newest first. Defaults to proposals that are currently open for voting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| space | Yes | Snapshot space id, e.g. "ens.eth" or "aavedao.eth" | |
| state | No | Which proposals to return | active |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two useful behavioral facts (sort order and default state filter) but says nothing about result volume, pagination behavior, or what a proposal record contains.
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 tight sentences, no filler, with the resource and ordering front-loaded ahead of the default-behavior note. Every clause earns its place.
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?
A simple three-parameter read tool with no output schema, so the bar is modest. Still, an agent gets no signal about whether 'limit' caps the page or total results, and no sense of the returned shape, which the description could cheaply have supplied.
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 67% — the space id and state enum are documented in the schema, and the description usefully restates that the default state means 'open for voting'. The limit parameter (default 10, max 50) is not explained in either place, so the description only marginally improves on the schema.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Lists proposals in a Snapshot space') plus ordering ('newest first'), so the core action is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like snapshot_open_proposals or snapshot_query, which an agent must choose between.
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?
'Defaults to proposals that are currently open for voting' implies the default filter behavior but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With snapshot_open_proposals and snapshot_query in the sibling set, a routing sentence is conspicuously absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.