nexo_backup_restore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only states 'DESTRUCTIVE' but does not detail what is destroyed (e.g., current database data), whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects like loss of recent changes. The minimal warning is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 very short and to the point, which aids quick understanding, but it lacks structure such as a brief explanation of the process or return behavior. It is not verbose but could benefit from more organized information without increasing length significantly.

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 simplicity of a single required parameter and no output schema, the description is barely adequate. It omits crucial context such as what happens after restore (e.g., database is automatically started) or the source of the backup file (e.g., local vs. cloud path), leaving gaps for agent decision-making.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, with a clear description for the filename parameter, including an example. The tool description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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 that the tool restores a database from a backup, and the parenthetical '(DESTRUCTIVE)' immediately signals the destructive nature. Among siblings (backup_list, backup_now), this is the only restore tool, so it distinguishes well.

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 includes a warning label 'DESTRUCTIVE' which implies use with caution, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like backup_list or backup_now, nor does it mention any prerequisites (e.g., database must be stopped).

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