snapshot_guest

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

Annotations only say it is a non-destructive write; the description adds the real behavioral context: tag precondition, auto-generated UTC timestamp name, return value, storage consumption until deleted, and refusal while Proxmox holds a lock. That is meaningful disclosure well beyond the annotations.

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?

Front-loads the action and precondition, then layers the exclusion (apply_updates), the storage caveat, and the lock caveat in short order. No filler sentences; every clause carries an operational fact.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, yet the description still notes it returns the name. Preconditions, side effects (storage use), lifecycle (deletion tools), and failure modes are all covered for a two-parameter mutation tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so vmid and description are already documented, and the description adds the useful point that the snapshot name is generated rather than supplied. It does not elaborate on the description parameter or its default, so it stays at the baseline for a fully documented schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a Proxmox snapshot of a guest now'), plus the naming convention, the required tag, and that it returns the name. An agent can distinguish this immediately from list_snapshots, rollback_snapshot, and delete_snapshot.

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?

Explicitly says it is not needed before apply_updates (which snapshots itself) and routes cleanup to delete_snapshot / delete_old_snapshots. Also states the precondition (tag 'pvewarden-update') and the failure condition (guest locked during backup), which is exactly the when/when-not guidance needed.

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