backup_board

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It indicates a write operation and returns a path, but does not mention whether it overwrites, side effects, or permissions needed. For a 0-param tool, this is minimal but not fully transparent.

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?

A single, 14-word sentence that front-loads the action and includes all necessary information without any superfluous content.

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 description covers action, resource, destination, and return value. For a simple tool with no parameters or output schema, it is mostly complete, but lacks details on error conditions or concurrency behavior.

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?

There are no parameters; the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by specifying the destination and output, fulfilling the baseline expectation for a parameterless tool.

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 action (write backup), the specific resource (THIS board), the destination (daemon's backups/ folder), and the return value (the path). No sibling tool performs this function, so it is well-distinguished.

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 should be used to backup the current board. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but given no sibling tool does backups, the context is clear.

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