snapshot_read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must expose behavioral traits. It reveals ordering and return content (paths) but does not state that the operation is read-only, mention any side effects, authentication needs, or error behaviors. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly disclosed.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the key action and result details without waste. Every word contributes value.

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?

While the tool is simple with only optional parameters and no output schema, the lack of parameter explanations and absence of any behavioral caveats makes the description incomplete for safe and correct invocation. An agent would need to guess the semantics of 'limit' and 'session'.

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% for the two parameters (limit, session), and the description does not explain their meaning or format. The agent cannot infer what values to provide or how they affect results, leaving a significant gap.

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 it lists captured screen snapshots for the meeting, with ordering (newest first) and content (paths). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tool snapshot_request by focusing on reading existing snapshots rather than requesting new ones, but does not explicitly name the alternative.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like snapshot_request. The phrase 'for this meeting' implies meeting context but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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