backup_db

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the use of SQLite's Online Backup API and declares safety during live operation. It also lists return fields. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., temporary locks), permissions, or file overwrite behavior. Still, it provides meaningful transparency beyond basic functionality.

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 concise with three distinct sections: a one-line summary, a technical note, and a structured Args list. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, parameters, and return values. It is complete for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description provides thorough parameter documentation in the Args section, explaining each parameter's purpose, defaults, and usage. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 verb ('Create') and resource ('timestamped backup of the Metis SQLite database'), which distinguishes it from siblings like restore_db (restore) and list_backups (list). The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description implies when to use (when a backup is needed) and notes safety during live operations, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or comparisons to alternative tools (e.g., encrypt_backup, verify_backup). Usage context is present but not fully explicit.

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