List backups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says 'List' and does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, permission requirements, or what happens when backups are locked or absent.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Its brevity is structurally clean, though it leaves important context to other dimensions.

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 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. The description omits pagination, filtering, panel selection, and return-value expectations that an agent would need to invoke it confidently.

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 7 parameters with only 57% description coverage, and the description adds meaning only for the 'server' parameter implicitly. It does not explain page, perPage, panel, or the inline credential/URL overrides.

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 essentially restates the tool name and title: 'backup_list' / 'List backups' becomes 'List the server's backups.' It adds the server scoping but does not differentiate the tool from siblings like backup_get or backup_download_url beyond the verb 'List.'

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus backup_get, backup_download_url, or other sibling backup tools. It also does not mention prerequisites such as needing a server identifier or panel context.

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