backup_get_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that times are UTC, that identifiers can be label/hostname/ID, and that enabled=false means backups are off, but it does not explicitly state read-only safety or permission requirements.

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?

Front-loads the purpose and uses a clean Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds useful context, though the Args section repeats the parameter name already in the schema.

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 simple read tool with an output schema, the description covers identifier resolution, timezone, and return semantics including the meaning of the enabled flag. No critical information for correct invocation is missing.

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 0% for the single parameter, but the description fully explains instance_identifier as accepting a label, hostname, or ID, adding necessary meaning beyond the bare string type.

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 ('Get the automatic backup schedule for an instance'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like backup_set_schedule and backup_get. An agent can tell exactly what the tool returns without opening the schema.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to choose it over backup_get, backup_list_all, or backup_set_schedule. No when-not conditions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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