snap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Saying 'Read' implies a non-mutating operation, but it does not describe return shape, permissions, whether refs are stable, or how selector/interactive affect behavior. This is a thin behavioral profile for a tool with four undocumented parameters.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately terse, though that terseness contributes to gaps elsewhere rather than being a flaw of structure itself.

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 four-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, one sentence is insufficient. An agent cannot infer what selector or interactive do, how site and profile interact, or what the snapshot actually contains.

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% and the description does not name or explain any of the four parameters (site, profile, selector, interactive). 'Session tab' vaguely hints at profile/site context but adds no real semantic value, leaving every parameter undocumented.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('ARIA snapshot with refs') plus scope ('from the session tab'). It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like open, exec, and close, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or contrast them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as exec or open, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by 'session tab' and 'snapshot'.

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