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

Goes well beyond annotations: states posts return as DRAFT, the 30-day recovery limit, that partial success is normal, and that the result reports per-post reasons for failures. These are non-obvious behaviors for a mutation tool that annotations (which only flag readOnly=false, idempotent=false) do not convey.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does, then layers constraints, failure semantics, and the sibling alternative in tight sentences. No filler; every sentence carries a distinct fact.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out; the description still summarizes the result shape (names restored posts and per-post failure reasons). For a nested-parameter mutation tool, this is complete enough for correct 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?

Schema coverage is already 100%, and the description reinforces the key parameter semantics by tying post_ids to the trash resource and noting the 50-item cap matches one page. This adds source-of-truth guidance beyond the schema without contradicting it.

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 verb (restore) and resource (several trashed posts), plus scope ('at once') that separates it from the singular restore_post sibling. An agent can tell the two apart from the description alone.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly ('restore_post handles a single post') and gives the operative condition (bulk restore, 30-day window). Points to postey://accounts/{account_id}/trash as the source of valid IDs, so the agent knows the prerequisite.

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