coolify_list_database_backups

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context that 'Sensitive destination paths are redacted,' which is not captured by annotations. This is a useful disclosure about output behavior, so the description contributes beyond the structured metadata.

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, focused sentence that states the core functionality and one key exception. No filler words or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a simple list operation with good annotations and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It explains the action and adds redaction behavior. However, the ambiguity with the sibling tool reduces its completeness, as the agent may need more context to choose correctly, though this is more of a usage guideline issue.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter 'database_uuid' with a clear description 'Database UUID.' The tool description does not add further parameter details, but since the schema already provides sufficient semantics, a baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List backup executions for a database.' It clearly states the action and target. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'coolify_list_backup_executions', which sounds similar, so it does not fully distinguish itself.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'coolify_list_backup_executions' or other backup-related tools. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative references, leaving the agent to infer usage from the description alone.

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