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

The description adds value beyond annotations by explaining why no conflict can occur ('archived row already holds its slug slot'), which aligns with idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. No contradiction.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds necessary behavioral context.

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?

The description covers purpose, ownership, idempotency, and conflict behavior. It could mention the effect of restoration on template state (e.g., becomes active), but overall sufficient given output schema exists.

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 already covers 100% of the parameter description (template_id as UUID or @handle/slug). The description repeats this without additional meaning, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Restore an archived template' which is a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'archive_template' and 'delete_template' by focusing on the unarchive action.

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 clearly states 'Owner only' and 'Idempotent on a live template', providing context for appropriate use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the ownership constraint is key.

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