get_snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds essentially nothing behavioral beyond that: no pagination, ordering, volume, or permission context, and no statement of what happens for a VM with no snapshots.

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?

A single tight sentence with the purpose front-loaded and the return fields listed compactly. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than deliberately minimal.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields (name, snapshot_id, date), which is the main thing an agent needs. However it omits pagination, ordering, empty-result behavior, and any routing to the sibling snapshot operations.

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% and the single parameter 'id' is documented in the schema as 'Virtual machine ID'. The description adds only the endpoint mapping, not format, range, or error semantics, so the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List virtual machine snapshots') and even names the underlying API endpoint (vm/get_snapshot), which clearly separates it from the mutating siblings create_snapshot, remove_snapshot and restore_snapshot. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiating in prose.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent is not told that this is the read path preceding restore_snapshot or remove_snapshot, nor that it requires an existing VM id. The usage context must be inferred entirely from the name.

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