Clone snapshots in Easysearch to create copies of specific indices from a source snapshot to a target snapshot within a repository for backup or testing purposes.
克隆快照
参数:
repository: 仓库名称
source_snapshot: 源快照名称
target_snapshot: 目标快照名称
indices: 要克隆的索引（逗号分隔）
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| repository | Yes | ||
| source_snapshot | Yes | ||
| target_snapshot | Yes | ||
| indices | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states '克隆快照' (clone snapshot) which implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if it's idempotent, what happens on conflicts, or any rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks essential operational context.
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 sized and front-loaded with the purpose first, followed by parameter explanations. No wasted sentences, though the structure is simple. It could be slightly more polished but earns its place efficiently.
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 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or operational constraints. For a mutation tool with multiple required parameters, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.
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 lists all 4 parameters with brief Chinese explanations, adding basic meaning beyond the schema's titles. However, it doesn't provide format details (e.g., what valid snapshot names look like) or explain the 'indices' parameter's comma-separated format beyond what's implied. It partially compensates but not fully.
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 '克隆快照' (clone snapshot) which is a clear verb+resource combination, but it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'snapshot_create' or 'snapshot_restore'. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity about what makes this cloning operation distinct from other snapshot 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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'snapshot_create' or 'snapshot_restore'. The description only lists parameters without explaining the context or prerequisites for cloning a snapshot versus creating a new one or restoring from one.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cloudsmithy/easysearch-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server