snapchat get write schema

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by warning that the returned fields reflect this server's implementation, not the full Snap API, and that preview rules are included—context not present in annotations or schema.

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, front-loaded sentences carry the essential scope and the key caveat without any filler. Every sentence earns 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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the tool's scope and caveat. Minor room remains to clarify when exactly to choose this tool over other schema/inspection siblings, but the definition is complete enough for correct invocation.

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?

The sole parameter is fully documented in the schema, including an enumeration of entity types and a clear description. The tool description adds no further param-specific guidance, 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 names a specific verb and resource: it discovers implemented creation/edit fields, required fields, and preview rules for a given entity type. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like snapchat_get_campaigns or snapchat_get_entity, but its scope as a schema-discovery tool is clear.

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 implies the tool should be used before creating or editing Snapchat entities, and it clarifies the schema is server-bound rather than exhaustive. However, it never states explicit when-to-use conditions or names alternatives, leaving the agent to infer that this tool precedes write operations.

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