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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that only content is restored while slug, folder, visibility and /lp address are untouched, that a new version is recorded, and how the share URL and open viewers behave (Refresh prompt, landing page on next load). This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot 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-loaded with the trigger, then the semantic constraints. Sentences are dense and long in the middle section, but each carries non-obvious behavior (address forwarding, viewer refresh) rather than filler.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema required, the description supplies everything an agent needs: when to call it, what state changes, what is preserved, and the prerequisite lookup for version_id.

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 100% and both required parameters plus workspace_id are documented in the schema. The description's only parameter note ('use list_versions to find the version_id') restates the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Restores a prior version's content as the site's current content') and clarifies the mechanism (records a new version). It is clearly distinguishable from update_site, delete_site and list_versions.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger ('Use when the user wants to undo the last update or go back to the previous version') and routes the agent to `list_versions` for the version_id and to `set_site_slug` when the address also needs restoring. Both the when and the alternatives are named.

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