create_container_snapshot

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutates) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the lifecycle risk level requirement, which is a behavioral constraint. No contradiction with annotations. Additional details about failure modes or concurrency are not needed given the annotations.

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 sentence plus a requirement, with no fluff. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

Given the four parameters with clear schema descriptions, an output schema, and annotations, the description is complete enough. It captures the essential purpose and risk level without needing to explain return values.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters. The tool description does not add any extra semantics beyond the schema, so baseline of 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 clearly states 'Create a snapshot of an LXC container', specifying the action and resource. It also includes a risk level requirement. The tool name and sibling tools (e.g., create_vm_snapshot, delete_container_snapshot) further differentiate it.

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 provides a precondition ('Requires PROXMOX_RISK_LEVEL=lifecycle'), guiding when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not, but the tool name and siblings imply it's for LXC containers, which is sufficient.

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