✓ SAFE: Back up SQLite DB, including committed WAL data.

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

The description includes the label 'SAFE' and notes WAL inclusion, but it does not disclose what 'SAFE' means, whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist, or what happens if parameters are omitted. With no annotations, this leaves important behavioral traits unexplained.

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 concise sentence, which is easy to process, but it is identical to the title, adding no additional value. It is appropriately brief but lacks substantive content beyond the tool's name.

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?

The description is too sparse for a backup tool. It does not explain return values, error behavior, how the backup is stored, or how parameters affect the operation. Combined with no annotations and no output schema, the overall context is incomplete.

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 description does not mention either parameter (backup_path or source_database_name) at all. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent without any semantic guidance for the parameters.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of scenarios where backup_database is appropriate. The description only states what it does, not when to invoke it.

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