get_admin_backups_by_file_name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states 'Returns a token to download a file', implying a read-only operation, but fails to disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens after obtaining the token. The description is insufficient given the lack of annotations.

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 very concise at one sentence, with no unnecessary words. However, it is too brief to be optimally helpful. A bit more detail could be added without losing conciseness, but it still scores well for being succinct.

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 has an output schema (context signals indicate 'has output schema: true'), the description need not explain return values. However, it still lacks context about the tool's role in admin backups, the prerequisite of having a file_name, and how the token is used. The description is incomplete for a tool with two parameters and no annotations.

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%, and the description does not explain the parameters at all. It does not add meaning to 'file_name' or 'accept-language' beyond what the schema provides. For a tool with two parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 'Returns a token to download a file' which clearly indicates the tool's action (return a token) and resource (a file). The tool name 'get_admin_backups_by_file_name' further specifies it's for admin backups, making the purpose clear. However, it could be more explicit about the context (admin 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't suggest that one should first list backups using 'list_admin_backups' to obtain the file_name, or that it's specifically for downloading backups. The description lacks usage context or prerequisites.

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