snapshot_status

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

Annotations already confirm readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it reports per-shard progress with stage, bytes done, and total bytes. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 very short, front-loaded, and conveys the essential behavior in a single line. There is no filler, redundancy, or restating of the tool name.

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 read-only status tool with an output schema, the description conveys the main value (per-shard progress). It is incomplete only in clarifying optional parameter behavior and how this relates to snapshot/list siblings, but it is otherwise adequate for basic invocation.

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 0% and the description does not explain what the 'snapshot' and 'repository' parameters mean, which combinations are valid, or what happens when they are omitted. The parameter names are reasonably self-explanatory, but the description still leaves invocation semantics ambiguous.

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 indicates a snapshot-status inspection tool, describing progress details like per-shard stage and byte counts. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'get' or 'list' and does not directly contrast with sibling tools like list_snapshots, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 phrase 'running or recent snapshots' gives implied usage context, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over related snapshot tools or whether it can be used for all snapshots vs only active ones. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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