Список бэкапов диска сервера

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

The description clearly indicates a read-only list operation, but the annotation readOnlyHint=false contradicts this by implying potential side effects. No other behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, performance) are disclosed, and the contradiction is a serious flaw.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. The first states the primary action and scope; the second adds useful domain context about disk-level snapshots and the prerequisite. No wasted words.

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 two-parameter list tool, the description covers purpose and prerequisite adequately. However, no return format or pagination details are given, and the annotation contradiction undermines the overall completeness.

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 descriptions provide complete coverage (100%) for both parameters, including how to obtain disk_id. The description essentially repeats the schema's guidance without adding parameter-level semantics beyond what is already documented.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Возвращает список') and identifies the exact resource (backups of a specific VPS server disk). It distinguishes the scope by noting backups are disk-level snapshots, not server-level, which differentiates from related 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?

Provides clear context that disk_id must first be obtained via the list server disks API, giving a prerequisite. It implicitly indicates this tool is for listing disk backups, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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