import_snapshot

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. The verb 'import' hints at a mutating operation, but the description says nothing about permissions required, whether existing data is overwritten, whether the import is reversible, or where the snapshot originates. For an unannotated import/mutation tool this is a substantial 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?

The phrase is short and technically front-loaded, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication. A four-word restatement of the tool name does not earn its place.

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?

For a mutating import operation with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, the description leaves everything an agent needs — usage context, behavior, parameter meaning — unspecified. It is not complete enough to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Both required parameters ('from' and 'names') have 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning for either. It is impossible to tell whether 'from' is a path, URL, snapshot ID, or host, or what form the 'names' array entries take.

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?

"Import system snapshot" essentially restates the tool name, adding no specificity beyond the verb and resource already encoded in the identifier. It does not distinguish this tool from close siblings such as load_snapshot, recover_snapshot, or recreate_snapshot, so an agent cannot tell what makes 'import' different from those operations.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of load_snapshot, recover_snapshot, or create_snapshot, nor any precondition or context. The agent must guess the usage scenario entirely.

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