snapshot_create

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds the useful context that the operation creates a safe point-in-time state. However, it does not disclose additional behaviors beyond the annotations, such as storage implications, performance impact, or whether the snapshot is immediate.

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 sentences: the first clearly defines the operation, and the second provides actionable context. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the operation, target, and typical scenarios. It does not mention how to later restore a snapshot or whether the snapshot id is returned, but those are covered by snapshot_restore and the output schema respectively.

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?

There is one required parameter, collection, with 0% schema description coverage, so the description should compensate with parameter guidance. The description only says the snapshot is 'of a collection', which adds almost nothing beyond the parameter name itself.

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 states the exact operation (creates a point-in-time backup/snapshot) and the target resource (collection). It is clearly distinguishable from the related sibling snapshot_restore because it explicitly describes creation rather than restoration.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: before risky operations like bulk re-ingest or schema changes, or as part of routine backup cadence. It does not state when not to use the tool or list alternative snapshot-related tools, which keeps it just shy of a 5.

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