replay_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the tier requirement and clarifies return of memories and link graph, which is moderately useful but does not go beyond what annotations provide significantly.

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 extremely concise with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and follows with parameter and return details in a clear, scannable format. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool has only 2 parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and a key requirement. It lacks details about 'memory snapshot' or 'edges', but the output schema likely handles return formatting, so this is acceptable.

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%, so the description bears full burden. It explains 'at' as an ISO timestamp and 'limit' as maximum memories with a default, adding meaning beyond schema types. However, it doesn't specify the exact ISO format or what happens if limit is exceeded.

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 states the tool reconstructs memory state at a specific time, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'replay_diff' or 'replay_timeline', missing a chance to distinguish.

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 mentions a prerequisite (Pro tier or Novyx Cloud) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'remember' or 'recall', nor any exclusion criteria. This is insufficient for an agent to make informed choices.

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