list_backups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose potential delays, authentication requirements, empty results, or other behaviors. The description is safe but lacks meaningful 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 short sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every word adds informational value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description is mostly complete. The output schema covers return values, and no complex behavior needs explaining. However, 'auto-backups' could be more specific about what is being backed up, though this is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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, so no parameter documentation is needed. The schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are required; the baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'List available auto-backups' clearly states the verb (list) and the resource (auto-backups). It distinguishes this tool from all sibling tools, none of which mention backups, so the purpose is 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?

The description implies the tool should be used when the agent needs to list auto-backups, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage is self-evident from the name and description, but there is no additional context.

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