list_snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful trait, the newest-first ordering, but says nothing about pagination behavior, whether results are scoped to a single run or all runs, or what a returned snapshot entry looks like.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the ordering constraint appended where it is most useful. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 simple read-only list tool with no output schema and a single optional parameter, the core idea is conveyed. However, nothing tells the agent what a snapshot identifies (name, timestamp, run association) or whether the list spans all backtest runs, which leaves real ambiguity about the returned data.

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 carries the full burden for the single 'limit' parameter and adds nothing about it — no mention of it being a maximum count, no upper bound, no interaction with the newest-first ordering. Only the self-evident parameter name and the schema default of 20 give the agent any footing.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List source snapshots') plus provenance ('written by run_backtest') and ordering ('newest first'). It implicitly separates itself from read_snapshot (single snapshot) and read_report (report contents), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 phrase 'written by run_backtest' implies the tool is used after a backtest run, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of when to prefer read_snapshot over this list, and no prerequisites. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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