memory_backup

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like the destructive nature of 'restore' or side effects of 'now'. Lacks important safety information.

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 short (one line plus list), which is concise, but the structure is minimal and could be better organized. It is not verbose, but also not optimally front-loaded.

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 and no annotations, the description should explain return values and actions in detail. It only lists actions without describing their effects or outputs, leaving significant gaps.

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%, so description adds needed meaning. It lists allowed values for 'action' and notes that 'backup_name' is only for restore. However, it does not explain other actions' parameter usage or format expectations.

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 says 'Manage backups' and lists specific actions (now, list, restore, status). This clarifies the tool's purpose to some extent, but it could be more explicit about backing up memory specifically. It distinguishes from siblings by focus on backups, though not fully.

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 on when to use this tool versus other memory tools. The actions list implies usage scenarios, but there is no explicit when/when-not or comparison with alternatives.

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