rba_capsule_snapshot

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates a non-destructive, save-state operation by calling it a 'snapshot' and 'restore point,' but it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., capsule must exist), whether snapshots are overwritten, or any other side effects. This is moderate transparency.

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 exactly two sentences, with the first front-loading the primary action and resource, and the second adding usage context. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or tangential information.

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 tool has a simple schema, but the description fails to explain the required 'id' parameter or the optional 'reason' parameter, and it gives no indication of return values or snapshot contents. With no annotations or output schema, the description is the only context and is insufficient for full operational clarity.

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 coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of the two parameters, 'id' and 'reason.' The agent must guess that 'id' refers to a capsule identifier and what 'reason' is for. This is a critical gap that prevents correct invocation without external knowledge.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' and clearly identifies the resource as 'a source snapshot for one script capsule.' It also differentiates from sibling snapshot tools by narrowing scope to a single script capsule and explicitly frames it as a time-travel restore point, which is a distinct purpose from development or context snapshots.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'before an edit or experiment' as a restore point. While it doesn't name alternatives like rba_development_snapshot or rba_context_snapshot, the guidance is clear and contextually sufficient for selecting this tool over broader snapshot options.

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