List VM Snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the return format (total and snapshots array), which is useful behavioral context. It does not add further details like whether the VM must be powered off, or how encrypted VMs are handled, but annotations lower the burden.

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 concise and well-structured with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. It states exactly what is needed and what is returned. However, it omits the vm_password parameter from the 'Args' section, which is a minor completeness issue, but the structure is otherwise efficient.

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?

For a simple, read-only list operation, the description provides the essential return structure (total and snapshots). The schema fills in parameter details. It lacks explicit notes on encrypted VMs or error behavior, but these are less critical for a non-destructive list tool. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's low complexity.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description mentions vmx_path but omits vm_password, which appears in the schema. No additional parameter semantics beyond the schema are provided, so the description does not elevate beyond the baseline.

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 the tool's function: 'List all snapshots of a VMware Fusion virtual machine.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_snapshot, revert_snapshot, and delete_snapshot. The word 'all' also clarifies the scope.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool's name and description—one would list snapshots before performing snapshot management operations like revert or delete. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites, so it stops at implied usage.

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