list_backups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'one page' scope but provides no additional behavioral details such as output format, ordering, or auth requirements. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not enriched.

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 is front-loaded with the key information. Every word earns its place, and there is no bloat or repetition of schema details.

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 list operation, the description provides the core function. However, with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the agent lacks information about what is returned, how pagination works, and whether server_id filters results. It is minimally viable but leaves important gaps for a 3-parameter tool.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any parameters or their semantics. The parameter names (page, per_page, server_id) are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to clarify how they interact or default behaviors. Since the schema provides no descriptions and the description does not compensate, this is a significant gap.

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 'List one page of server backups' clearly specifies the verb (list), the resource (server backups), and even the pagination scope (one page). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_backup, delete_backup, and deploy_backup, which perform different operations on backups.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is self-evident, the description does not mention when not to use it or reference any alternative list tools. The agent must infer usage from the context, and no exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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