snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: it explains the returned content, the ordering of pop-ups under '## Pop-up', and that warnings flag CAPTCHAs and sign-in pages. It does not cover limits, pagination, or ref stability, but the added behavioral detail is meaningful.

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 two concise sentences with the most important information front-loaded: what is returned, followed by pop-up ordering and warning semantics. Every sentence contributes useful context without waste.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need limited explanation, and the description still summarizes them. For a read-only snapshot tool with one obvious session_id parameter, this is nearly complete, though it could clarify when to call snapshot versus related siblings.

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?

There is one required parameter, session_id, with 0% schema description coverage. The description never mentions session_id or explains its role, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation. The parameter is obvious from its name, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 what the tool returns: current URL, title, and interactive elements with [eN] refs. The mention of refs 'to use in other tools' implicitly links it to click/type tools, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like screenshot, find, or read_text.

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?

Usage is implied by 'refs to use in other tools,' which suggests calling snapshot before an interaction. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus screenshot, find, or read_text, and no stated exclusions or alternatives.

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