encrypt_backup

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it produces an .enc file, never stores the passphrase, uses Python stdlib (hashlib, os.urandom), and details the implementation (PBKDF2+AES-GCM). It also mentions the return format, covering key behavioral aspects.

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 well-structured with a summary line, bullet points, and an Args section. However, it includes some redundant implementation details (e.g., 'Uses Python stdlib only') that could be trimmed without losing clarity.

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 (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers key aspects: input, output format, behavior, and warnings. It could be more complete by mentioning error conditions or the pre-requisite that the backup file must exist, but overall it is sufficient.

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 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section provides clear explanations for both parameters: backup_path as 'Full path to the .sqlite backup file' and passphrase as 'Encryption passphrase.' This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's minimal titles.

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: 'AES-256-GCM encrypt a backup file.' The verb is specific (encrypt) and the resource is clearly a backup file. It distinguishes itself from siblings like decrypt_backup and verify_backup by focusing solely on encryption.

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 includes a note advising against production use and clarifying that the passphrase is never stored. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., after creating a backup) or when not to use it (beyond the production caveat).

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