emu_list_snapshots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose return format, ordering, or behavior when no snapshots exist. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but offers minimal transparency.

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 four words and every word earns its place. It is front-loaded with the action verb and directly states the resource, with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter list operation, the description is sufficient for an agent to know what the tool does and when to call it. No output schema exists, so return value details are absent, but that gap is minor given the simplicity and inferable list semantics.

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 has zero parameters and no required properties, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not introduce any contradictions or missing parameter context.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('persisted emulator snapshots'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It is also distinct from sibling snapshot tools like emu_load_snapshot, emu_export_snapshot, and emu_import_snapshot, which describe different operations.

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 implies the tool should be used when an agent needs to enumerate persisted snapshots, but it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives among siblings. For a trivial list operation, this implied usage is acceptable, though explicit routing would be stronger.

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