list_snapshots

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly states the operation is read-only and specifies the timestamp format ('wall-clock timestamp in whole seconds') and returned fields. This gives an agent enough behavioral context to understand the tool's output and side-effect profile.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the resource first, then enumerates the key output fields, and ends with the read-only qualifier. Every clause adds useful information with no wasted words.

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 parameterless read-only listing tool, the description is fairly complete: it identifies the operation, the output fields, timestamp semantics, and safety profile. It could add explicit context about ordering or what happens when no snapshots exist, but those are minor gaps.

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 accepts zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantic burden. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description's mention of returned fields further clarifies what the no-argument call will produce.

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 identifies the resource (snapshots currently held in the game) and enumerates the exact fields returned: label, object path, taken timestamp, and property count. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tools like snapshot_object and forget_snapshot by describing a listing operation, though it never uses an explicit verb like 'list'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as diff_object, snapshot_object, or forget_snapshot. It notes that the tool is read-only, but does not explain scenarios like enumerating snapshots before comparing or deleting them.

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