MemorySnapshotDelta

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does substantial work: it tags the tool as read-only and debug-scoped, and discloses the authorization requirement plus the batch-mode exclusion, which are real invocation constraints. It stops short of describing volume/performance or the shape of the comparison result.

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?

Two dense sentences with the mode tags, the core operation, the available views, and the two hard constraints front-loaded. Nothing is padded or repeated across sentences.

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 six-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, view taxonomy, authorization, and the batch-mode restriction, which is most of what an agent needs. The remaining gap is the relationship to the sibling snapshot tools and the size/format of the delta result.

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 100%, so all six parameters including the view and detail enums are already documented in the schema. The description paraphrases the views (memory by kind, largest objects, children, referrers) but adds nothing about from_id/to_id ordering, max_objects, or detail levels beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it compares two memory snapshots and returns one of four views. It clearly distinguishes a delta operation from single-snapshot reads, though it never names MemorySnapshotList or MemorySnapshotGet as the alternatives.

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?

Prerequisites are given (memory snapshot authorization required, must run outside batch mode), which tells the agent when it can call. But it never says when to prefer this over MemorySnapshotList/MemorySnapshotGet or DebugCreateMemorySnapshot, so the choice among snapshots is left to inference.

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