GetAllServices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Get all associated backend services' but doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation, whether it requires authentication, its rate limits, error handling, or pagination behavior. The description is minimal and fails to provide essential behavioral context for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 single sentence that efficiently states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a basic tool, though it could benefit from more detail given the parameter complexity. There's no waste, but it may be overly concise for the context.

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's complexity (5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'backend services' are, how results are returned, or handle the undocumented parameters. For a list/query tool with filtering and ordering capabilities, this description lacks necessary context 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 0%, so the description must compensate for 5 undocumented parameters. It adds no information about parameters like 'skip,' 'limit,' 'orderColumn,' 'orderAsc,' or 'nameFilter,' leaving their purpose, formats, or usage completely unclear. The description fails to provide any parameter semantics beyond the tool's general intent.

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 states the tool 'Get all associated backend services for integration with Veeam Backup & Replication,' which provides a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('backend services'). However, it lacks specificity about what 'backend services' entail and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetAllManagedServers' or 'GetAllRepositories,' making it somewhat vague. It avoids tautology but doesn't fully distinguish its scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context for 'integration,' or exclusions, and with many sibling tools (e.g., 'GetAllManagedServers'), there's no indication of how this tool fits into the broader workflow. Usage is implied only by the name, lacking explicit instructions.

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