list_universal_snapshots

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context by specifying 'for multiple assets of a specific type', which hints at batch retrieval, but doesn't detail aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, or output format. It doesn't contradict annotations, but adds limited value beyond them.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately concise. However, it's front-loaded but lacks structure for a tool with 6 parameters, potentially oversimplifying. It earns its place but could benefit from more detail given the complexity.

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 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, annotations for read-only, and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but misses parameter explanations and usage guidelines. The output schema reduces the need for return value details, but the description doesn't fully address the tool's complexity, leaving gaps in context.

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 schema provides no parameter details. The description mentions 'type' and implies 'multiple assets' (possibly related to ticker_any_of), but doesn't explain any of the 6 parameters' meanings, formats, or interactions. It fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving parameters largely undocumented.

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 the tool 'Get universal snapshots for multiple assets of a specific type', which provides a basic verb+resource (get snapshots) and scope (multiple assets, specific type). However, it's vague about what 'universal snapshots' entail compared to other snapshot-related tools like get_snapshot_all or get_snapshot_ticker, lacking specific differentiation from siblings. It's not tautological but remains general.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like get_snapshot_all and get_snapshot_ticker, there's no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. Usage is implied only by the description's scope, but no explicit context is provided.

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