show_snapshots

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'Show', implying read-only, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: e.g., what is shown (all snapshots? latest?), ordering, pagination, or required permissions. With an output schema, return structure is defined, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the name.

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?

Description is very short (4 words), which is concise but not ideally informative. It could be expanded to include purpose or usage guidance without becoming verbose. The structure is fine, but the content is too sparse to earn a higher score.

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 complexity of Iceberg snapshots and the presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what snapshots are, whether this shows historical snapshots or current, or why one would use this tool. The output schema helps but does not replace the need for contextual explanation in the description.

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 100% (all three parameters have descriptions: 'catalog name', 'schema name', 'The name of the table'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond these minimal schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema covers parameters fully.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Show' and resource 'Iceberg table snapshots'. It distinguishes from siblings like show_files or show_manifests by the specific resource (snapshots), but lacks context on what snapshots are or how they relate to other Iceberg concepts, which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include expire_snapshots, which relates, but description offers no context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or when to prefer this tool over other show_* tools.

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