nexterm_list_backup_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the scoping phrase 'available to the backup subsystem' and says nothing about what the listing returns, ordering, pagination or permission requirements.

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?

One tight sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter listing tool.

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 read-only, single-enum-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it does not say what a returned file entry looks like (name, path, size, timestamp) or how to use the result with nexterm_restore_backup or nexterm_delete_backup_file.

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 coverage is 0%, but the single parameter is a self-describing enum ('recordings'/'logs') and the description mirrors those values as 'recording or log files', so the mapping is inferable. It does not state that file_type is required or explain the semantics of each choice beyond the enum names.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('List Nexterm recording or log files') and scopes it to 'the backup subsystem', which is clear. It does not, however, distinguish this from adjacent sibling tools such as nexterm_list_provider_backups, so the boundary has to be inferred.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives like nexterm_list_provider_backups or nexterm_get_backup_storage. The agent must guess the context in which this listing is appropriate.

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