infomaniak_list_swiss_backup_slots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the scoping behavior ('belonging to a Swiss Backup subscription') but does not disclose other behavioral traits like pagination, ordering, or whether all slots are returned regardless of status. It does not contradict 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy or filler. Every word earns its place.

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 tool is simple: one required parameter, output schema available, and annotations covering safety. The description fully states the operation and scope. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 has zero description coverage, leaving the description to compensate. The description clarifies that slots are tied to a Swiss Backup subscription, which helps infer that swiss_backup_id identifies the subscription. However, it does not explicitly map the parameter to the subscription ID or explain constraints like exclusiveMinimum. The parameter name is self-explanatory but the description could do more.

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 ('List') and resource ('backup slots') with clear scope ('belonging to a Swiss Backup subscription'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_swiss_backup_slot (singular) and manage_swiss_backup_slot (mutating).

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 usage (when you need to list slots for a subscription) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives, such as get_swiss_backup_slot for a single slot or manage_swiss_backup_slot for modifications. No exclusions are stated.

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