backup_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe, non-mutating behavior is covered. The description adds only the scoping idea of 'by type or all', which is a modest behavioral insight but does not disclose details like output format, pagination, or how the sort/limit parameters affect results.

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, compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and the main optional scoping distinction, earning its place without redundancy.

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?

With five optional parameters, no output schema, zero parameter descriptions, and several backup-related sibling tools, this description is too thin. An agent cannot infer what 'detailed', 'sort', or 'limit' mean, nor how backup_list differs from backup_status, leaving important context missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining parameters. It only hints at 'type' and 'all' with 'par type ou tous', but leaves sort, limit, and detailed entirely unexplained. This is insufficient for a tool with five optional parameters.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Liste tous les backups disponibles' (list all available backups), with an explicit filtering hint 'par type ou tous' (by type or all). It clearly names the tool's purpose, though it does not differentiate it from the sibling backup_status, which could also be about listing or showing backups.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as backup_status, backup_verify, or backup_clean. It does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer when 'list backups' is the appropriate call.

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