list_backups

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

There are no annotations, so the description must communicate behavioral traits. 'List available backups' implies a read-only operation but says nothing about return format, pagination, filtering behavior, or any side effects. The term 'available' is vague and unqualified.

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 a concise three-word phrase with no filler words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, but it may be too terse for complex usage. Still, it earns its place as an efficient summary.

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 tool has two parameters, no output schema, and many related backup siblings, the description is insufficient. It does not clarify what data is returned, how node and backupdir affect results, or how this tool fits into the backup lifecycle (create, restore, delete).

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (node, backupdir) with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema states, so a baseline 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 'List available backups' clearly states a list operation on backups, distinguishing it from sibling backup tools like delete_backup or create_vm_backup. However, it lacks detail on what 'available' means or whether it covers VM, container, or both, which prevents a top score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as restore_backup or create_vm_backup. The description is purely functional and gives no context about prerequisites or typical workflows.

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