list_backups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is well covered. The description adds no behavioral details beyond the endpoint, such as what the returned list represents or whether it is complete, but with strong annotations this is acceptable.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the second line 'GET /api/backups' is largely redundant with the first sentence, so it does not fully earn its place, preventing a perfect score.

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, read-only list tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could be slightly more explicit about listing all backups or scoping behavior, but an agent can invoke this tool correctly based on the provided information.

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 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because with no parameters, the description cannot reasonably add parameter-level meaning.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get api backups' with the corresponding GET endpoint. It is reasonably distinguishable from sibling backup tools like create_backups and delete_backups_by_id, though it does not explicitly say 'list all' or explain what 'api backups' are.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_backups, delete_backups_by_id, or get_backups_by_id_download. The HTTP verb and resource imply a read-only listing operation, but no explicit usage context or exclusions are provided.

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