uad_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels: explains each action's effect, safe restore ordering, dry_run default and return behavior, automatic pre-restore snapshot capture, and scope limitations. This goes well beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core mechanics in the first two sentences and usage guidance in the second paragraph. Every sentence conveys meaningful information with no 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?

For a complex multi-action tool with no annotations and minimal schema guidance, the description is remarkably complete: action modes, scope, safety behavior, use cases, and exclusions are all covered. The output schema exists to handle return-value details, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does explain action, ignore glob patterns, and dry_run semantics, but leaves name, include_clock, include_monitor, and allow_cross_model to be inferred from their names. This is a notable gap given seven parameters.

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 identifies a multi-action snapshot tool for whole-rig state, detailing save/list/diff/restore. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that target individual settings by focusing on comprehensive 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?

Provides explicit use cases ('saving a session state before experimenting, seeing what drifted, or putting a known-good state back') and clear exclusions ('Not for: Console sessions or plugin scenes'). It does not name alternative sibling tools, but the when/when-not guidance is strong.

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