create_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'create', implying a mutation, but omits details such as whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or takes time. This is insufficient for safe decision-making.

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 concise with two short sentences followed by an Args list. The main action is front-loaded. While the Args list repeats parameter names, it adds minimal overhead. No superfluous content is present.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description need not detail return values, but it lacks other contextual completeness such as error scenarios, preconditions (e.g., server must exist), or post-conditions. For a tool with close siblings, this incompleteness can lead to suboptimal selection.

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 must add value. It defines server_uuid as 'The UUID of the server to snapshot' and label as 'Optional label for the snapshot', which provides basic semantics beyond the schema's type and title. However, it lacks detail on format, constraints, or example values.

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 the action ('Create a snapshot') and the target resource ('a VPS server'). This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes the tool from siblings like create_backup, which deals with backups rather than snapshots. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself, so it's strong but not perfect.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_backup or other server management tools. There are no exclusions or context given, leaving the agent without information to decide between similar operations.

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