list_cloud_diagram_layer_snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool's safety profile is clear. The description adds useful context that Cloud Diagrams visualize infrastructure, and states the return behavior (list of snapshots). No contradictions. It could mention pagination or ordering, but the annotations and description together provide adequate transparency for a non-destructive read operation.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence provides background context, which is somewhat tangential but not harmful. The second sentence directly states the function. It is front-loaded with the main action. Could be slightly more efficient by removing the first sentence, but it is still well-structured.

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 simplicity (list snapshots for a layer) and the absence of an output schema, the description gives a basic understanding but lacks details on pagination (limit, offset), ordering (sort), and what information the snapshot list contains. For a list operation with multiple parameters, it is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 only 20% (only customerContext has a description). The tool has 5 parameters, but the description only implicitly ties 'id' to the diagram layer. There is no explanation for sort, limit, offset, or how they affect the result. With low coverage, the description should compensate by detailing the parameters, but it does not.

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 that the tool returns a list of saved snapshots for a specified diagram layer. It uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('list of saved snapshots'), and the reference to 'specified diagram layer' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cloud_diagram_layer_snapshot (singular) and other cloud diagram manipulation tools.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for listing snapshots but offers no context about prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparisons to siblings like get_cloud_diagram_layer_snapshot or export_cloud_diagram_json. The presence of many sibling tools makes this lack of guidance noticeable.

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