pve_snapshot_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on full responsibility. It explicitly marks the tool as 'read-only' and describes the output structure, including the synthetic 'current' node. This adequately conveys the safe, non-destructive behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that cover purpose, output details, scope, and references to related tools. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or clutter.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose, scope (VMs and containers), read-only nature, and pointers to action tools. This is complete for a listing tool.

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 parameter schema coverage is only 25% (only proximo_target has a description). The tool description adds value by clarifying the 'kind' parameter with examples ('qemu' or 'lxc'). However, it offers no additional guidance on vmid, node, or the default values, leaving room for 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 tool lists a guest's snapshots, specifies the returned fields (name, description, parent, creation time, plus synthetic 'current' node), and explicitly notes it works for both VMs and containers. It also distinguishes from sibling action tools by mentioning pve_snapshot_create and pve_rollback.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (list snapshots) and indicates it is for VMs and containers. It references action tools for further steps. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with other listing tools, but the context is sufficient.

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