pve_backup_job_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It declares 'READ-ONLY' and describes the return structure as '{jobs: [...], unprotected_guests: [...]}'. This adequately discloses the non-destructive behavior and output, though it could mention any permissions or rate limits, which are not critical for this list tool.

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 three sentences long, each adding essential information: purpose and safety, return format, and alternative tools. There is no redundancy or unnecessary text; every sentence 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, and the description covers the core functionality (listing jobs and unprotected guests), the output structure, and pointers to complementary tools. Since there is an output schema available, the description does not need to detail return values further. It is complete for effective use.

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 description coverage is 100% for the only parameter 'proximo_target', which is well-described in the schema. The description does not add additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so 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 clearly states 'list all PVE cluster backup jobs and guests not covered by any job' and explicitly marks it as 'READ-ONLY'. It also names sibling tools pve_backup_list and pve_backup_freshness, distinguishing its purpose from them.

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 directly tells when to use alternative tools: 'For the actual archives on storage use pve_backup_list; for a per-guest freshness verdict against these jobs' promises use pve_backup_freshness.' This provides clear guidance on context of use.

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