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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, but the description adds substantial behavior: weekly full and daily differential backups, continuous transaction log archiving, a minute-granular restore window, Valkey-specific hourly snapshots with 24-hour retention, and the vms.read permission scope. It does not describe pagination or response shape, but it is far richer than the annotations alone.

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 dense but front-loaded with the backup schedule and restore-window information. Every sentence contributes useful context, though the long parenthetical first sentence reduces immediate scannability.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool, the description covers backup cadence, retention, restore window, engine-specific behavior, and permission scope. It does not explain the exact return shape, but with no output schema the description provides enough to call the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the single required 'database' parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 implies it lists completed backups and the restore window for a database, and distinguishes itself from restore_database by naming that sibling. It never states the verb 'list' explicitly, but the resource and scope are clear.

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?

It routes the agent to restore_database when a restore is needed, making the alternative explicit. It does not state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear for a read-only backup listing.

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