create_file_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and purpose, without mentioning side effects, permissions, reversibility, or any operational constraints. The description does not contradict annotations (none exist), but it adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the operation ('Create a new snapshot') and includes a brief purpose clause. Every word adds value; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 create operation with only two parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly conveys the core action and differentiates from snapshot-related siblings, though it could optionally mention return behavior or follow-up actions.

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%, with both fileId and label already described in the schema. The description itself adds no additional parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb+resource structure ('Create a new snapshot (version) of a file') and clearly differs from sibling tools like restore_file_snapshot, update_file_snapshot, and delete_file_snapshot. The purpose is unambiguous and directly states what the tool accomplishes.

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 context ('for backup/versioning'), implying when to use it compared to snapshot-related siblings. It does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer that this is for creation, not restoration or modification.

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