list_backups

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states the source (msdb) and the action (list), which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly disclose permissions, the meaning of 'recent' (e.g., time window), or any side effects. The description is not misleading, but it leaves room for ambiguity.

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 that immediately conveys the core action and scope. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers the essential behavior. It does not detail the return format or specific fields, but for a simple listing operation, the current description provides enough context for an agent to understand what the tool does.

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?

The schema has one parameter, databaseName, with a description covering its optionality and default value. The tool description merely repeats the filtering concept without adding new details. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('recent backup history from msdb'), with an optional filter ('by database name'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like backup_database or get_backup_file_list, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for viewing backup history and optionally narrowing to a specific database, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or mention exclusions. Sibling tools like get_backup_header and get_backup_file_list exist, yet no comparison or alternative guidance is provided.

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