snapshot_scene

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the operation is non-mutating ('without changing anything') and that the snapshot surfaces in the history sidebar for restore. It doesn't cover persistence, retention limits, or whether snapshots can collide, so not quite a 5.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The core action is front-loaded and the conditional guidance follows immediately; every clause earns its place.

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 2-param, no-output-schema tool with fully documented parameters and a clear usage trigger, this is nearly complete. A minor gap is the absence of any note on what a successful snapshot returns or whether the user must confirm it, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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 100% and both parameters are richly documented there (label purpose, 'Always set it', scene id resolution via list_scenes). The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond this, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb ('stash the current state') plus resource (scene), and it immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by stating 'every other tool here snapshots on its own,' which clarifies why this one exists alongside update_elements, add_elements, etc.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: 'Do this before editing a .excalidraw file directly with your own file tools.' It also states the implicit when-not — other tools snapshot automatically, so no manual snapshot is needed for them. The routing decision is unambiguous.

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