list_snapshots

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

The description discloses read-only and idempotent behavior, the empty-list edge case with the 'current' pseudo-entry, and the node/vmid binding safety property. Since no annotations are provided, this thorough behavioral context fully carries the transparency burden.

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?

Three concise sentences, each with a distinct purpose: defining the operation, describing the empty-list edge case, and explaining the safety binding. No unnecessary words.

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 description covers edge cases, idempotency, and safety properties. With an output schema present, return values need not be described. It is complete for a simple read-only listing tool.

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?

It adds meaning to node and vmid by explaining they are bound together, and 'exactly one guest' implies vmid identifies the guest. However, the profile parameter is not mentioned at all, and with 0% schema coverage, this partial compensation leaves a gap.

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 the tool lists snapshots for exactly one guest, with specific fields (parent, description, timestamp, RAM state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_guests and get_guest_status.

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 phrase 'exactly one guest' provides clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or describe when not to use it, so it stops short of full guidance.

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