lattice_list_backup_destinations

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully convey behavior. It indicates a read operation ('list') but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. For a simple list tool, this is minimally adequate but lacks transparency about what the client can expect.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero fluff. Every word is necessary and clear.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description carries full contextual weight. While it states the basic purpose, it could be improved by noting that the result is a list of destination objects or linking to related tools. As is, it is adequate but leaves room for the agent to infer details.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema is fully covered. The description correctly implies no input needed. Since there is nothing to explain, a score of 4 is appropriate (baseline for zero-parameter tools).

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 action ('List') and resource ('configured backup destinations that database snapshots can be shipped to'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like lattice_get_backup_destination (single destination) and create/update/delete/test variants.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The available sibling tools (e.g., lattice_get_backup_destination) imply different use cases, but the description does not mention them or provide exclusion criteria.

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