qa_get_app_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose two useful behavioral traits: the result is 'server-truth' (not cached/client state) and 'bounded' (limited in size). It does not explain the truncation behavior, ordering, or whether max_rows applies per section or to the whole snapshot, but the basics 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 a single sentence and front-loads the main action and result. The capitalized list 'Today, Progress' is slightly ambiguous but the overall structure is efficient with no filler.

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 large sibling set, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It does not clarify what constitutes 'Today' or 'Progress', how max_rows affects the response, whether this call supersedes the individual qa_get_* tools, or what the returned snapshot shape looks like.

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 0%, and the description never mentions max_rows by name or explains how it controls the snapshot. The word 'bounded' only hints at the parameter's effect without mapping it to the actual input, leaving the agent to guess how the limit 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and names a concrete resource: a bounded server-truth snapshot across Today, Progress, entitlement, usage, and account data. It is clear enough that an agent can tell this is an aggregate read tool, though it does not explicitly contrast with the individual sibling getters.

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 context is implied: this tool provides a combined snapshot across several data domains, so an agent can infer it is for cross-domain retrieval. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this instead of qa_get_entitlement, qa_get_usage, or other siblings, nor any exclusions.

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