list_backups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only says the tool lists backups. It does not indicate that this is a read-only operation, whether the 'days' default silently limits results, how the filters combine, or what the return looks like.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably too terse given the behavioral and usage gaps it leaves unfilled.

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 tool with three optional filtering parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description omits key context: that days defaults to 30 (implying default filtering despite 'todos os backups'), what the filters do together, and the read-only nature of the call. An agent could invoke it but not confidently predict results.

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%, so all three parameters (days, database, backupPath) are already documented in the schema with defaults. The description adds nothing beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Lista todos os backups'), which is unambiguous and easily distinguished from create_backup or restore_backup by verb alone. It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting with any sibling, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus create_backup, restore_backup, or archive_old_data, nor any mention of prerequisites or typical context. The description is purely a purpose statement.

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