get_as_of_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It correctly indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation and mentions the enterprise tier. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, performance considerations, or access restrictions beyond tier, leaving gaps.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no filler. The key term 'Time-travel query' is front-loaded, immediately conveying the core function.

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 tool has four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It covers the high-level purpose and use case but omits details on return values, error conditions, or parameter constraints (e.g., date range limits). For a simple snapshot tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 75%; one parameter ('limit') lacks schema description. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it reiterates 'as_of' as ISO 8601 without further detail. It does not explain 'limit', 'query', or 'entity' semantics beyond their names.

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 purpose: a time-travel query to return corpus state at a historical date. It uses specific verbs ('return the corpus state') and distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'time-travel' and 'Enterprise tier', which is unique among the listed sibling tools.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Enterprise tier' and 'Useful for backtesting and audit trails.' It implies when to use this tool (historical queries) but does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it.

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