List ribbon backups

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It adds context about backup timing and restore compatibility, but does not explicitly state that this is a non-destructive read operation or describe what happens when no backups exist. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but the description could be more explicit.

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?

A single sentence that starts with the action, and includes relevant context (backup timing and restore linkage) without waste. Every clause adds value.

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 this is a simple list operation with no required parameters, no output schema, and a clearly stated purpose, the description covers the essential information. The tie to ribbon_restore_backup makes the tool's role in the workflow clear. Minor omission: no description of the response format, but that's acceptable given the tool name.

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 input schema already fully describes both parameters ('Filter by entity' and environment with env var fallback), so the description need not repeat them. It adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with 'List backup zips' – a specific verb and resource – and clarifies the backups are 'taken at checkout and before every publish,' making it distinct from sibling tools like ribbon_get_structure or ribbon_checkout. The connection to ribbon_restore_backup further solidifies its purpose.

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?

It explains the backups are those 'that ribbon_restore_backup can re-import,' linking directly to a sibling tool and signaling this list is a prerequisite for restore operations. It also states when backups are created, giving context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly state exclusions, but the linkage provides clear usage guidance.

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