Version file

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful 'pre-edit snapshot' context but does not explain what a snapshot entails, whether it persists, or what the returned output represents beyond what the output schema provides.

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 five-word sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and the intended use case efficiently.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation. It could be slightly more explicit about usage timing, but nothing critical is missing for a straightforward snapshot operation.

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%, so the description should compensate, but it only mentions 'a single file' and does not elaborate on the path parameter's meaning, required format, or constraints. The path schema is minimal and the description adds little beyond the schema's own 'Path' title.

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 identifies a snapshot of a single file intended for pre-edit use, giving both a specific resource and a clear purpose. It is distinguishable from plain read tools by the 'snapshot' framing, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'create' and does not fully differentiate from other snapshot-related siblings.

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 phrase 'pre-edit' implies when the tool should be used: before modifying a file. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it, nor does it name alternatives such as read_file, head_file, or snapshot_create.

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