List backups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It states the operation is a listing (read-only by implication), specifies the returned fields, and adds the superuser-only permission requirement. This is sufficient for a simple list tool, though it does not detail side effects or pagination behavior.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, enumerates the output fields, and appends the permission constraint. Every word earns its place with 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 zero-parameter, list-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: the resource, returned metadata fields, and access restriction. It omits ordering or pagination details, but those are likely non-issues for a straightforward backup listing.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but none is needed; the schema already conveys that the tool takes no arguments.

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 'List' with a concrete resource, 'available backup files', and enumerates the returned fields (key, size, modified date). This distinguishes it clearly from backup mutation siblings like create_backup, delete_backup, and restore_backup.

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 a clear operational context and a superuser-only access restriction, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs alternatives such as download_backup or get_backup_download_url. Usage guidance is implied rather than stated.

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