celebrum.snapshot

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Return a snapshot' strongly implies a read-only operation and the list of contents clarifies what the snapshot covers, but the description does not explicitly guarantee side-effect freedom or describe output format, freshness, or error 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 a single sentence with no redundant words. The parenthetical list efficiently communicates the snapshot contents without overloading the main statement.

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 tool's low complexity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete: it states the action and the returned components. It falls slightly short by not specifying the output shape or any usage caveats, but those are not critical for a no-argument snapshot call.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The zero-parameter baseline applies, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information.

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 ('Return') and a clearly defined resource ('snapshot of the whole brain') with an explicit enumeration of components (persona, memory, truth, guardrails, tensor). It is clear and distinct from the sibling operations (simulate, propose/approve_guardrail, validate), though it does not explicitly contrast itself with celebrum.recall.

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 intent to fetch a full-state snapshot is implied by 'Return a snapshot...', so an agent can infer when to call it, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance nor mentions any alternative tools. There are no preconditions or exclusions stated.

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