proxmox_cluster_backup_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions 'elevated' for mutations but does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return format. Given 38 parameters and no output schema, more transparency is needed.

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 very concise but too minimal given the tool's complexity (38 parameters). It front-loads the purpose effectively but lacks any structural breakdown (e.g., per-action parameter tables). Every sentence earns its place, but the conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 38 parameters, 11% schema coverage, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions in the tool description, the contextual completeness is low. The description does not explain parameter dependencies (e.g., id needed for get/update/delete but not for list/create) or provide examples of valid combos.

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 no information about parameters beyond the action enum. With schema description coverage at only 11%, the description should compensate but fails. The agent has no guidance on how parameters interact with each action (e.g., which are required for create vs update).

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 manages cluster backup jobs and enumerates five actions (list, get, create, update, delete). This differentiates it from sibling tools like proxmox_cluster_config or proxmox_cluster_firewall which manage different aspects of the cluster.

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 lists the possible actions and marks create/update/delete as 'elevated', providing basic guidance on when each action is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., other backup-related tools), though the sibling list shows no other backup job tool.

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