backup_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses side effects (iNAV reboot and auto-reconnect), the exact command run ('diff all'), the output file pattern, and a return value ('rebooted': True). Minor gaps include whether a connection is required and any potential errors, but the disclosure is solid.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds value: the command, output location, iNAV behavior note, and argument explanation. No redundant or verbose text.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: action, mechanism, side effects, return value, and argument. It could mention prerequisites like being connected, but that is likely implicit from sibling tools. Overall, adequate for reliable invocation.

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 schema only lists 'label' with no description, but the tool description clearly explains it as 'Optional suffix added to the filename for easy identification.' This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage and adds meaningful semantics.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource+destination: 'Save the current FC config to a timestamped backup file.' It also specifies the implementation ('Runs diff all') and output location, distinguishing it from sibling tools like restore_config and list_backups.

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 purpose implies when to use the tool (to back up config), but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as restore_config or list_backups, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context is evident but not stated explicitly.

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