Inspect Micro record backups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond these flags by noting the backups are 'bounded transactional,' include a 'fresh digest,' and explicitly exclude users, purchases, entitlements, products, files, and deployments. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two compact sentences with the primary verb 'Read' front-loaded. Every clause carries meaningful information about scope and exclusions, with no filler or repetition.

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 single-optional-parameter read-only inspection tool with a full output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned and what is excluded. Annotations cover the safety profile, so the agent has all essential information to invoke the tool 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the path parameter as the Micro project directory with a default. The description adds no additional meaning for this parameter, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 begins with a specific read verb and names a precise resource: 'bounded transactional project-record backups' plus the 'fresh digest of the current record set.' It clearly distinguishes itself from mutation siblings like micro_backup_create, micro_backup_restore, and micro_backup_delete, and the exclusion list further pinpoints what the data covers.

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 read-only intent is clear, but there is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as micro_backup_create or micro_backup_restore. The usage context is implied by the verb 'Read' and the sibling names, not directly stated.

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