clitest_add_snapshots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add CLI output snapshot tests' without explaining whether files are created or modified, what side effects occur, whether existing tests are overwritten, or what the tool expects of the project structure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is concise and readable, though it sacrifices informative detail for brevity.

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 two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain how the directory relates to the snapshot tests, why api_key is needed, or what happens after invocation, so an agent could not confidently call the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 description mentions no parameters, and the schema only describes 'directory' while leaving 'api_key' undocumented. With schema coverage at 50%, the description does not compensate for the missing parameter context, leaving the agent to guess the purpose and required format of api_key.

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 a specific action ('Add') and a specific resource ('CLI output snapshot tests'), which makes the tool's purpose clear. It is not a tautology because it expands on the tool name by specifying the output-snapshot nature, but it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like clitest_generate_suite or clitest_add_mocks.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clitest_generate_suite or clitest_add_mocks. The description only states what the tool does; it does not mention prerequisites, when to prefer this tool, or when to avoid it.

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