backup_object_list

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

The description includes a [READ] hint indicating idempotence, but with no annotations, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination, permissions, or side effects. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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 brief and front-loaded with the [READ] tag and purpose. The args list is clear and efficient, with no redundant information.

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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explain the return format or how to use the results (e.g., object IDs for restores). It is adequate but lacks completeness for downstream tool usage.

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 description adds meaning to parameters beyond the schema: backup_id is identified as a Veeam backup id with a cross-reference to backup_list, and target is described as a Veeam target name from config. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'protected objects inside a stored backup', distinguishing it from sibling tools like backup_list (lists backups) and restore_list_points (lists restore points).

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 when you have a backup_id and want to see its objects, and refers to backup_list for obtaining the ID. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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