create_backup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only says a backup is created and does not mention whether existing backups are overwritten, where the backup is stored, whether it is a long-running or blocking operation, or whether the operation is safe to repeat.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action and the target resource clearly and efficiently, earning its place.

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?

The tool is simple and its one parameter is fully documented, but the description omits important surrounding context such as side effects, return behavior, and storage location. With no annotations or output schema, this leaves some gaps, though the tool is still minimally invocable.

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 only parameter, backupName, is fully described in the schema as 'Name for the backup file', giving 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents what an agent needs.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' with a clear resource: a backup of the Trilium database. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like create_note or create_revision because those target individual notes rather than the whole database.

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 intended use is implied by the name and description — you call this when you want a database backup — but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose it over alternatives or whether it should be used before other operations. No sibling tool offers a directly competing backup action, so the lack of explicit exclusions is less harmful.

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