Share Backup

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

Discloses far more than the annotations: nothing is copied until the recipient accepts within 48 hours, the accepted copy is billed to the destination, the source backup/bill are unchanged, the request is always pending even when the same user owns both spaces, and Manage Backups is required. This is unusually rich behavioral context for a destructive-hinted mutation.

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?

Front-loads the action ('Offer a copy...') before the conditions, and each sentence carries distinct information (timing, billing, pending semantics, permission). Slightly dense but no filler.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers timing, acceptance, billing ownership, permission requirements, and the always-pending behavior — everything an agent needs to invoke and warn the user correctly.

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% and each parameter is documented in the schema (spaceId default behavior, backupId via list_backups, destinationSpaceId). The description only implies the destination parameter via 'the destination space'; baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the semantics.

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?

States a precise verb+resource: 'Offer a copy of a backup to another space.' This is clearly the initiation step, distinguishable from accept_backup_share, decline_backup_share, and cancel_backup_share among the siblings.

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?

Gives clear context: confirm the destination with the user first, needs Manage Backups permission, and the offer stays pending. It does not explicitly name accept/decline/cancel siblings as the follow-up alternatives, but the framing makes the corresponding workflow evident.

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