get_backup_job_included_volumes

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must disclose behavior. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), but does not mention authorization requirements, error conditions (e.g., if backup job ID is invalid), rate limits, or side effects. The presence of an output schema reduces some burden, but the description itself provides minimal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no fluff. The purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter is explained in a clear docstring format. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the tool is a simple retrieval with one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could mention that the output is a list of volumes or clarify that it's read-only. Still, the output schema likely covers return details, so it's not incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for the sole parameter 'id' by stating 'Backup job ID.' This clarifies the purpose beyond the schema's minimal 'Id' title and type string. For a single parameter, this is adequate.

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's purpose: 'Get volumes included in a backup job.' It distinguishes from siblings like get_backup_job (which likely returns job details) and list_backup_jobs (lists jobs). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar get tools, but the name helps.

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 alternatives. No prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios are mentioned. The description is purely declarative.

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