List Script Snippets

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the tool returns snippets along with their code and usage frequency, and it requires project context to be set. This is meaningful beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose, adds return content detail, and ends with the prerequisite. Every clause earns its place, and there is no fluff or repetition of the tool name beyond the natural verb use.

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, the description is complete: it identifies the resource, the project-scoped context requirement, and the key returned fields (code and usage count). Pagination semantics are already fully covered by the input schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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 100%, so the input schema fully documents the three parameters (skip, take, searchTerm). The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, but per baseline it doesn't need to since the schema already carries the semantic weight.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('the project's reusable pre-request and post-response script snippets'), and what is included ('code and how often each is used'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_doc_snippets and other list_* tools without needing to open the schema.

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 provides clear usage context by stating 'Requires project context,' which tells the agent a prerequisite before invoking the tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource scope is specific enough that the intended use case is clear.

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