MemorySnapshotList

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses read-only/debug intent, that results are empty without memory snapshot authorization, and that it runs outside batch mode. It stops short of describing output shape or side effects in more detail, but the key constraints are present.

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, front-loaded with tags and purpose, and every phrase adds useful context. There is no filler or 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 low-complexity, fully schema-documented list tool, the description covers authorization and batch-mode constraints. However, with no output schema, it does not explain the return structure or clarify the distinction from MemorySnapshotGet and MemorySnapshotDelta, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 100%, so both the user and detail parameters are already well documented in the schema, including the detail enum. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the authorization note, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource (memory snapshots) and implies a list operation via the name and phrase 'the system lists.' It is clear enough to distinguish from unrelated tools, but it does not explicitly differentiate from MemorySnapshotGet or MemorySnapshotDelta.

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?

Usage is only implied through the [debug] tag and the constraint 'Runs outside batch mode,' which effectively says not to use it in batch contexts. There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over MemorySnapshotGet or MemorySnapshotDelta.

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