Get Most Recent Backups

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/non-open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior the annotations do not: the 30-day retention window, NULL date semantics for databases without backups, and an Azure SQL availability constraint. It stops short of describing row shape or ordering, but that is minor.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core scope before the alternative and the availability caveat. Every sentence carries distinct information with no redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of conveying return semantics, and it does: per-database latest Full/Diff/Log with NULL dates when absent. Combined with the Azure exclusion and the sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. No misuse is possible from missing parameter documentation.

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 resource (backups) with a precise scope: the most recent Full, Differential and Log backup per database over the last 30 days. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling mssql_db_backup_history, which it names, without requiring the agent to open either 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?

Explicitly routes the agent to mssql_db_backup_history for single-database history, giving the selecting condition ('one database's history'). It also states an environment exclusion ('Not available on Azure SQL Database'), covering both when-to-use and when-not.

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