pbs_snapshot_protected_set

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses mutation behavior, conditional risk (protected=True vs False), irreversibility, lack of rollback primitive, and the dry-run mechanism. It also includes the HTTP path and a note about param names, providing comprehensive behavioral transparency.

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 fairly concise, covering essential points in a few sentences. However, the structure could be more organized (e.g., separate sections for risk, usage, path). It earns its sentences but could be slightly tighter.

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?

The description covers the main behavioral aspects and risk, but given 8 parameters and high complexity, it lacks parameter-level guidance. An output schema exists, so return values aren't needed, but the description does not address parameter semantics sufficiently for complete tool understanding.

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 only 13% (only one param documented), and the description adds minimal parameter details beyond listing param names in a 'smoke-confirm' note. It does not explain the meaning or format of key parameters like backup_time, backup_type, or the role of confirm.

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 explicitly states the verb 'set or clear' and the resource 'PBS snapshot', distinguishing it from sibling tools like pbs_snapshot_delete or pbs_snapshot_notes_set. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides risk guidance for both settings of the protected flag and mentions the dry-run default and confirm=True to execute. However, it does not explicitly contrast usage with alternatives or specify when not to use this tool.

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