create_email_backup

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. However, it merely restates the tool's name without disclosing what 'email configurations and data' includes, where the backup is stored, or whether it overwrites existing backups. It does not even confirm the backup is non-destructive.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action. It contains no filler and is easy to parse quickly.

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?

With no parameters, annotations, or output schema, the description is minimal but sufficient for a basic understanding. However, it lacks details about the backup scope (exactly which email data is included), storage location, or how to reference the backup later, which is relevant given the presence of restore and list backup sibling tools.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema already covers all inputs completely. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the baseline for zero-param tools is 4, and there is no conflict or missing parameter information.

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 creates a backup specifically for email configurations and data. This distinguishes it from sibling backup tools like create_database_backup or create_full_backup, which have different scopes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other backup tools (e.g., create_full_backup, create_homedir_backup) or how email-specific backup differs. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions.

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