List database backups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful detail that the result includes failed as well as successful backups, and the 'GET /admin/database-backups' line discloses that this is an admin-scoped endpoint requiring elevated auth — meaningful context beyond the 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?

Very short and front-loaded: purpose first, then a scope detail, then the endpoint metadata. The title restated as the first line is mild redundancy, but nothing else is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description could say more about the returned backup entries (fields, ordering, pagination), yet it only mentions that both successful and failed backups appear. Given the tool's simplicity and its safety annotations, this is adequate but leaves a gap around return shape.

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 takes zero parameters and schema coverage is trivially 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to convey. Baseline 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 specific verb and resource (list database backups) and clarifies the scope as both successful and failed backups. It is clearly distinct from siblings like immich_download_database_backup or immich_delete_database_backup by name, but the description itself does not articulate that differentiation.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives named. The agent must infer that this is the admin listing tool and that download/upload/delete are separate operations purely from sibling names.

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