erinys_backup

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the operation and return value, but omits details about path semantics, default backup location, file overwrite behavior, or what 'consistent' means regarding SQLite locking/checkpointing.

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 gets straight to the point. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, but could usefully mention the path parameter without becoming verbose.

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 tool with no annotations and no parameter documentation, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain how the 'path' parameter affects the backup, what metadata is returned, or any prerequisites/limitations. The output schema exists but that does not excuse the missing parameter semantics.

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 one parameter 'path' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention the parameter at all, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 action (create a consistent SQLite backup) and the result (return backup metadata). It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'erinys_export' or 'erinys_save' by explicitly naming backup.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'erinys_export' or 'erinys_save'. There are no exclusion criteria or mentions of alternative tools.

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