list_snapshots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys ordering behavior ('newest first') and the snapshot scoping, but never states that this is a safe, read-only operation, what effects listing has, or how it behaves for devices with no snapshots. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a meaningful gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that places the verb action first and packs purpose, scoping, and ordering into minimal words. Every element earns its place; there is no fluff or 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?

The output schema exists so return values are covered, and the overall complexity is low (one parameter). Yet the single required parameter is entirely undocumented across both schema and description — an agent cannot know what values are valid for 'device.' For a tool whose whole invocation hinges on that one argument, this is an incomplete definition.

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% and the description never mentions 'device' — the one required parameter. The agent is left without any clue about valid device identifiers, their format, or how they relate to sibling tools like list_devices. With zero schema documentation and zero description compensation, this is the weakest dimension.

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?

Uses a specific verb 'List' with a precise resource 'config snapshots taken before Safe Mode writes,' plus an ordering qualifier 'newest first.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like diff_snapshots, which compare snapshots, and export_config, which retrieves configuration — a well-scoped purpose that needs no further inference.

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 'before Safe Mode writes' context implies this tool is for inspecting pre-write snapshots, which agents can infer as a recovery or verification step. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over diff_snapshots or export_config, and no exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions are given.

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