backup_database

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose permissions, side effects, or overwrite behavior. It only mentions the backup action and optional compression, omitting prerequisites, database locking, or file overwrite policy. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise.

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 schema is well-documented, but the lack of annotations, output schema, and behavioral details (e.g., what happens if the file exists, whether a confirmation is returned) leaves the agent guessing about operational context. The description is adequate only for the simplest invocation.

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?

All four parameters have detailed schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description's mention of 'optional compression' is not mapped to any parameter, which adds slight confusion but does not lower the baseline.

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 the specific verb 'backup' with a clear resource ('SQL Server database') and output format ('.bak file'), distinguishing it from restore/list backup tools. It also mentions optional compression, which is an additional distinguishing feature.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios like pre-migration backups or references to restore_database or list_backups. The description only states the action without any contextual usage.

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