ecp_mongo_backup_to_storage_bd

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It identifies the operation and destination, but does not mention whether the backup is synchronous or asynchronous, whether it creates a snapshot/job, whether it overwrites existing backups, what permissions are required, or what the response indicates.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loads the core action and resource, and is immediately scannable. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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?

The tool is simple, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what happens after invocation and how results are observed. It fails to mention storage.bd configuration prerequisites, job/status tracking, or return behavior, leaving an agent with incomplete context for a backup operation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but there is only one parameter, db_name, whose purpose is fairly obvious. The description adds that the database is MongoDB, giving some semantic context, but it does not explicitly state that db_name is the name of the database to back up or mention any constraints like existence requirements.

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 states a specific action ('Back up'), a specific resource ('a MongoDB database'), and a clear destination ('the account's storage.bd tenant'). This distinguishes it from sibling backup tools for MySQL, MSSQL, and PostgreSQL by naming MongoDB explicitly.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ecp_mongo_restore_from_storage_bd, ecp_storage_bd_job_status, or ecp_backup_list_snapshots. The intended use is only implied by the name and one-line description, with no exclusions or alternative routing.

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