Diff RE snapshots

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds context about what is diffed but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as output format, performance characteristics, or prerequisites beyond the parameter IDs. This is acceptable given the annotations, but not particularly rich.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the main action and scoped appropriately.

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?

The description is adequate for a read-only diff operation with annotations, but it does not explain what the output looks like or what 'selected runtime state' means. It also doesn't mention the maxChanges limit or prerequisite that snapshots must exist. Without an output schema, this leaves some ambiguity for the agent.

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 only 25% (only clientId has a description). The description does not explain beforeId, afterId, or maxChanges semantics beyond what is inferable from names. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, especially for maxChanges which is not self-explanatory.

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 identifies the verb ('Diff') and the resource ('in-memory snapshots'), specifying the types of content compared (script versions, remote schemas, selected runtime state). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like capture_re_snapshot (create) and list_re_snapshots (list).

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need differences between two snapshots. It does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough that an agent would not confuse it with capture or list operations.

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