Skip to main content
Glama
backrest-mcp

backrest-mcp

by TadMSTR

list_plans

Retrieve backup plans with paths, repository, schedule, retention, and hooks to see what each plan backs up and when, without exposing secrets.

Instructions

List the backup plans: which paths each backs up, to which repo, and when.

Returns the same secret-free projection of each plan as get_config: id, repo, paths, excludes, iexcludes, schedule, retention, skipIfUnchanged, backupFlagCount and hooks (action type names only). Prefer this to get_config when you only need plans.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_plans"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does well: it says the projection is secret-free, lists the returned fields, and clarifies that hooks expose action type names only. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior or permission requirements, but the list operation and field disclosure make the safety profile reasonably clear.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose and routing guidance are front-loaded, and the second sentence gives useful field-level detail. The field list is somewhat dense, but it supports plan inspection and does not bury the main instruction.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description supplies everything needed to select and call it correctly. It adds useful context about the projection and sibling relationship without duplicating unnecessary schema details.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter meaning to compensate for. The description appropriately does not invent parameters or filtering options.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it lists backup plans and explains what each plan contains (paths, repo, schedule). It also differentiates from the sibling get_config by describing the relationship and when to prefer this tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly names get_config as the alternative and states the condition for choosing list_plans: use this when you only need plans. That gives the agent a clear routing rule rather than leaving selection to inference.

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