get_backup_status

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses the data source (log file), the specific fields reported, and error case when log is missing. Sufficiently transparent for a read-only status check.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, field list, error case. No wasted words, front-loaded with main action.

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 zero parameters and an implicitly defined output schema via the field list, the description is complete. Sibling tools provide context. No missing critical information.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as description adds no param info but none is needed.

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?

Clearly states it reports on the last run of the niborserver backup pipeline, lists specific fields returned, and mentions error behavior. Distinct from sibling tools which target different systems (container, freqtrade, grafana, smartd, system health, influxdb, loki).

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?

Does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives, but the sibling context makes it clear this is for backup status. Implicit usage guidance is adequate.

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