list_backups

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return structure (paths, sizes, timestamps) and implies read-only behavior via 'list,' but does not mention permissions, side effects, or limitations beyond merge origin.

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?

Concise with a clear purpose line and structured Args/Returns sections. Every part adds value without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional param, no output schema issues), the description sufficiently covers purpose, parameter, and return. However, lacking usage guidelines reduces completeness for an agent choosing among siblings.

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 adds 'Filter backups by profile (all if not specified)' to the single parameter profile_name, which is absent in the schema (only type and default). This provides clear meaning and usage context.

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 clearly states 'List backup files from previous merge operations,' specifying the verb (list) and resource (backup files). This distinguishes it from siblings like restore_backup and apply_merge, which have different actions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., restore_backup, list_profile_configs). The description does not provide context for selection or exclusions.

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