burp_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only describes a read operation without mentioning side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or behavior when no snapshot exists (e.g., returns null). This leaves significant ambiguity for an agent.

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?

Two sentences, zero wasted words, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool is simple (1 optional param, no output schema). The description covers purpose and a use case but omits the return format/structure (how cookies and storage are represented) and behavior for missing snapshots. Adequate but not thorough.

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 parameter `url_contains` is already documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 tool returns the most recent session snapshot, specifying the resource (cookies, localStorage, sessionStorage) and action. This distinctly distinguishes it from sibling tools like burp_requests (list HTTP requests) and burp_issues (security issues).

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?

Explicitly mentions the tool is 'useful for constructing authenticated requests,' providing clear context. However, it does not specify when not to use it or compare to alternatives like burp_requests for older snapshots.

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