archy_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool writes a baseline file, but does not mention side effects like overwriting existing files, required permissions, or idempotency. The stated behavior is adequate but could be more detailed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by a succinct usage directive. Every sentence adds value with no redundant information.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema (details not shown), the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and usage context. It specifies what is captured and when to call it. However, it does not describe return values or error conditions, but these may be covered by the output schema.

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 only parameter 'path' has 0% schema description coverage and the tool description does not explain its meaning. While it implies the path likely refers to the directory for the baseline file, this is not explicit. The description fails to add value beyond the schema, leaving ambiguity.

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 states the verb 'Capture' and specifies the resource (score, cycles, layer violations) and the output file (.archy/baseline.json). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tool archy_diff by explaining its role as a baseline for comparison.

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 explicitly says 'Call at the start of an editing session,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also references the 'loop' prompt for full usage, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to similar tools like archy_record_baseline.

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