list_snapshots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions returning 'metadata and stats,' which gives some insight into the output, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, describe ordering/pagination, or disclose any potential side effects. The word 'list' implies reading, but explicit disclosure is absent.

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 front-loads the main action and resource. Every word is meaningful, with no fluff 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 listing tool with complete schema parameter documentation, the description is largely sufficient. It gives a general sense of the return content ('metadata and stats') but does not detail pagination, ordering, or the exact structure of the response. Since the tool is low-complexity and the schema covers parameters, a slightly abbreviated description is acceptable.

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 schema already documents all three parameters (build_name, limit, tag_filter). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 applies because 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 clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('snapshots for a build'), and mentions that it includes metadata and stats. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like snapshot_build (create) and restore_snapshot (restore), making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage for viewing snapshots of a specific build but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. It lacks the explicit 'use X instead' guidance seen in higher-scoring examples, though the context of sibling tools (e.g., list_builds, get_build_stats) makes the intended use fairly clear.

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