database_backups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It implicitly indicates a read-only operation via 'List' and specifies a filter ('validated manual and pre-migration'), but it does not elaborate on what 'validated' means or any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. It adds some context but is not rich in behavioral detail.

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 a single, 6-word sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word is informative, with no fluff or repetition, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 listing tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete: it names the resource and filter. However, it does not explain domain terms like 'pre-migration' or what 'validated' entails, which could leave the agent uncertain about expected results. The output schema likely covers return structure, so the description need not do so.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, which is acceptable. The schema coverage is trivially 100%, so no compensation is needed.

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 ('List') and resource ('validated manual and pre-migration backups'), clearly differentiating from the sibling tool 'database_backup' which likely creates backups. The scope is explicit and unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'database_backup' (which creates backups). There are no exclusions or contextual hints, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool's name and description.

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