pbs_remote_scan_groups

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

Without annotations, description carries burden; it declares read-only and adversarial nature, but lacks detail on error handling, rate limits, or output size limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus two tags. Front-loaded with READ-ONLY, every sentence provides value.

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?

Covers purpose, usage context, adversary warning, and config need. Output schema exists so return description not needed. Slight gap assuming knowledge of pbs_pull/push, but overall complete for a read-only listing tool.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so description adds no further semantic detail. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'list backup groups on a remote's datastore' and connects to pbs_pull/push use cases, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pbs_remote_scan and pbs_remote_scan_namespaces.

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?

Explicit context for use before pbs_pull/push, mentions adversarial data and config requirements, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives beyond implied context.

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