forget_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a side effect, 'frees memory in the game process,' but it also states 'Read-only,' which is misleading since dropping snapshots is destructive. It does not mention irreversibility, whether references to snapshots become invalid, or any other consequence.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action, but the 'Read-only' phrase is contradictory and muddles the message. Not every clause earns its place because the misleading label detracts from the otherwise efficient sentence.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main action and a meaningful side effect. Still, it leaves uncertainty about the return value, whether the operation is reversible, and what 'Read-only' actually means in this destructive context.

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 single parameter, label, has no schema description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining that it selects one stored snapshot or all snapshots via label='*'. It adds the crucial wildcard behavior beyond the bare parameter name, though it does not specify matching rules or where labels come from.

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, 'Drop', and names its resource, 'stored snapshot', making the core action clear. It also distinguishes itself from snapshot-related siblings by implying deletion rather than creation or listing, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 implies when to use the tool: when memory used by stored snapshots should be freed. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it, how it compares to list_snapshots or snapshot_object, or any prerequisite such as listing snapshots first.

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