Capture a labeled before/after snapshot for verify-fix

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that sub-captures are best-effort (if one fails, others still complete) and that a workaroundNotice is surfaced. It also notes required parameters, offering solid transparency for a composite tool.

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, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the core function and important constraints. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple outputs, best-effort behavior, chaining with other tools), the description adequately covers the purpose, required inputs, and workflow context. No output schema is provided, but the description implicitly describes the output artifacts.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context like using 'before'/'after' for label and the best-effort behavior, but does not significantly extend the meaning beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 is a composite snapshot that writes three artifact types (.memgraph, .png, .ui.json) prefixed by a label. It differentiates from siblings like 'captureMemgraph' (which only captures memgraph) by specifying the multi-artifact nature and its role in before/after flows.

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 explicitly says it is 'designed to bracket a fix or a replayScenario call' and to 'chain into diffMemgraphs', providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives.

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