List snippets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety behavior is covered structurally. "Reads account data" adds nothing beyond the readOnlyHint annotation and omits pagination behavior, multi-account resolution, and truncation semantics, which are the genuinely useful unknowns here.

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 two sentences are short but the problem is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded or prioritized, and both sentences are too thin to orient the caller on a 10-parameter listing tool.

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?

With 10 optional parameters, 30% schema coverage, no output schema, and no sibling differentiation, the description is nowhere near complete enough to invoke this tool correctly. Field names like snippet_type and include_content are left entirely to inference.

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?

Only 30% of the 10 parameters carry schema descriptions, so the burden falls on the description to compensate for the rest. It explains none of them — after, before, archived, per_page, snippet_type, include_content, and include_total_count are undocumented in both places, leaving seven parameters with zero semantic guidance.

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?

"List snippets" merely restates the tool name and title without adding a specific verb-plus-scope framing. It never distinguishes this from siblings like get_snippet, create_snippet, or update_snippet, so the agent gets no help disambiguating the read-many operation from the read-one or write operations.

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 second sentence, "Reads account data," gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. An agent cannot tell from this whether list_snippets is preferred over get_snippet or how it relates to archived or filtered retrieval.

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