pve_backup_list

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

The description declares the tool as 'READ-ONLY', indicating no side effects, and explains its behavioral property (ground truth) relative to another tool. However, without annotations, it could disclose more about permissions or performance, but it is sufficient for safe invocation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with 'READ-ONLY: list backup archives...', and every sentence provides value. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and full schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose and key nuance (ground truth vs tasks_list). It could mention limitations like node scope or error cases, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a list 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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters. The description mentions 'storage' implicitly but does not elaborate on parameters like 'node' or 'proximo_target' beyond schema defaults.

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 backup archives in a storage' and distinguishes from sibling pve_tasks_list by noting that it is the ground truth for backup existence, which pve_tasks_list may miss. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: as the ground truth for backup existence, and contrasts with pve_tasks_list which might miss backups due to node or window limits. This provides clear guidance on choosing this tool over alternatives.

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