deployado_create_backup_target

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that backups are stored in S3, but it does not mention permissions, duplicate-name behavior, or side effects of creating a target.

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 short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no wasted wording. The S3 storage note is brief but useful.

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 schema fully describes all parameters and annotations cover the mutation safety profile, so the minimal description is not inadequate. However, for a create tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, it omits context such as whether setup prerequisites exist and what happens after creation.

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 9 parameters are already documented in the schema, including defaults for db_port and retention_keep_last_n. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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: 'Create a new database backup target.' It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like list_backup_targets, get_backup_target, run_backup, and restore_backup, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 implies usage through 'Create a new...' but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It lacks routing context that would help an agent choose it confidently.

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