cat_snapshots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states it 'gets snapshot list' without disclosing behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, what format the output takes, if there are pagination considerations, or any rate limits. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 appropriately concise with two lines: a purpose statement and a parameter listing. There's no unnecessary verbiage, and it's front-loaded with the main function. However, the parameter section could be more integrated rather than a separate bullet-like format.

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 complexity (snapshot management in what appears to be an Elasticsearch/OpenSearch context), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'snapshot list' contains, how results are structured, or any operational constraints, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only lists 'repository: 仓库名称' (repository: repository name) which repeats what's in the schema without adding meaningful context about what constitutes a valid repository name, format expectations, or how this parameter affects the snapshot listing. This provides minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 '获取快照列表' which translates to 'Get snapshot list', providing a clear verb ('get') and resource ('snapshot list'). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'snapshot_get' or 'snapshot_status', leaving ambiguity about what specifically distinguishes this tool from other snapshot-related 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple snapshot-related tools in the sibling list (snapshot_get, snapshot_status, etc.), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions that would help an agent choose appropriately between them.

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