Academic Writer MCP

Lister les sauvegardes

list_backups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists available backups by date with size details, helping you identify which version to restore or review.

Instructions

Sauvegardes disponibles (les plus récentes d'abord), avec taille et date.

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_backups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`folder`	Yes
`backups`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds the useful ordering guarantee (most recent first) and the fields included per entry, but with an output schema present those field details are partly redundant, leaving a modest addition beyond structured data.

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?

A single short sentence with zero waste, and the most useful detail (ordering) is placed immediately after the resource. It reads as a fragment without an explicit verb, which slightly weakens front-loading of the action.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-parameter, read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and an output schema, the description covers what is listed, how it is ordered, and what each entry carries. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is absent, though a note on whether results are bounded would have closed the last gap.

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 schema baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter behavior is misstated or missing.

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

Purpose4/5

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

"Sauvegardes disponibles" names the resource precisely and adds the ordering ("les plus récentes d'abord") and returned fields ("taille et date"), so an agent knows exactly what this returns. It is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource statement, and it does not distinguish itself from the sibling create_backup, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as create_backup for creating a backup versus listing existing ones. The only signal is the tool name itself, which the description merely restates.

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

Deploy Server