backup_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions storage location and retention pruning but does not clarify whether restore is destructive, authentication needs, or error conditions. This is adequate but lacks detail 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 concise at about 70 words, using a bullet list for actions. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Could be slightly tighter but no significant waste.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential actions, storage path, and retention policy. It mentions that 'list' returns sizes and ages, which is helpful. It is reasonably complete for this tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% with all four parameters described. The description adds brief context for each action (e.g., 'Create a new backup now') but does not substantially extend beyond the schema meanings. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already documents 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 clearly states the tool is for creating, listing, or restoring SQLite database backups. It then lists each action with a one-line explanation, making the purpose specific and distinct from unrelated sibling tools.

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 implicitly conveys that the tool is for backup operations, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. Given the sibling tools are unrelated, the lack of explicit guidelines is a minor gap.

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